Obama Names Video Games as Health Concern in Speech to A.M.A.
Obama Names Video Games as Health Concern in Speech to A.M.A.
June 15, 2009
In a speech to the American Medical Association in Chicago today, President Obama mentioned video games as a factor in unhealthy, sedentary lifestyles.
As reported by the New York Times, Obama addressed the AMA as part of his drive to build support for sweeping healthcare reform. The Wall Street Journal's Health blog has the full text of the President's remarks. Here's what he said about video games:
The second step that we can all agree on is to invest more in preventive care so that we can avoid illness and disease in the first place. That starts with each of us taking more responsibility for our health and the health of our children. It means quitting smoking, going in for that mammogram or colon cancer screening. It means going for a run or hitting the gym, and raising our children to step away from the video games and spend more time playing outside.
In other speeches, Obama has frequently linked video games to academic underachievement.
A PUBLICATION OF THE ECA
SUBSCRIBE
LOGINGamePolitics ShoutBox
Posted 02/09/10 at 03:51pm
DarkSaber: I think he just goes round the internet copy+pasting the same bollocks to get attention.
DarkSaber: I think he just goes round the internet copy+pasting the same bollocks to get attention.
Posted 02/09/10 at 03:41pm
Valdearg: @DS: I have to admit, I chuckled when I saw the 4 Feb 2010 on that post.. >.<
Valdearg: @DS: I have to admit, I chuckled when I saw the 4 Feb 2010 on that post.. >.<
Posted 02/09/10 at 03:31pm
DarkSaber: Hm, Bioshock. Not that Zippy likes to beat the dead horse by ranting about it for TWO $&%£ING YEARS!
DarkSaber: Hm, Bioshock. Not that Zippy likes to beat the dead horse by ranting about it for TWO $&%£ING YEARS!
Posted 02/09/10 at 03:30pm
DarkSaber: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.173063-Bioshock-yet-another-zippy-rant
DarkSaber: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.173063-Bioshock-yet-another-zippy-rant
Posted 02/09/10 at 03:20pm
DarkSaber: Although, unsurprisingly, he's just being called an idiot alot and criticised for being as illegible as always.
DarkSaber: Although, unsurprisingly, he's just being called an idiot alot and criticised for being as illegible as always.
Posted 02/09/10 at 03:18pm
DarkSaber: Oh good lord, I just found Zippy on The Escapist.
DarkSaber: Oh good lord, I just found Zippy on The Escapist.
Posted 02/09/10 at 03:14pm
Valdearg: IE: Male body/Female Mind or Female Body/Male Mind.
Valdearg: IE: Male body/Female Mind or Female Body/Male Mind.
Posted 02/09/10 at 03:13pm
Valdearg: @Zip: TG == Transgendered/Transsexual.
Valdearg: @Zip: TG == Transgendered/Transsexual.
Posted 02/09/10 at 03:09pm
DarkSaber: Forget it Zippy, it's an abbreviation of a big word and so would be wasted on you
DarkSaber: Forget it Zippy, it's an abbreviation of a big word and so would be wasted on you
Posted 02/09/10 at 03:07pm
ZippyDSMlee: Vlag:....TG?
ZippyDSMlee: Vlag:....TG?
Posted 02/09/10 at 03:02pm
Valdearg: @DS: Im sure that's what they'd do if it wasn't legal to just tell Gays/TG's to "Screw off," just because they're who they are.
Valdearg: @DS: Im sure that's what they'd do if it wasn't legal to just tell Gays/TG's to "Screw off," just because they're who they are.
Posted 02/09/10 at 02:50pm
DarkSaber: Whoever told him/her/it that is dumb. They should have done like most companies and made-up some bullshit, yet legal, reason for it not getting the job.
DarkSaber: Whoever told him/her/it that is dumb. They should have done like most companies and made-up some bullshit, yet legal, reason for it not getting the job.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:16pm
Andrew Eisen: Shouldn't be. Spirit of anti-discrimination laws would seem to include sexual orientation (and eye color). Plus there's always equal protection and such. Never know until you try.
Andrew Eisen: Shouldn't be. Spirit of anti-discrimination laws would seem to include sexual orientation (and eye color). Plus there's always equal protection and such. Never know until you try.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:10pm
Andrew Eisen: Should have sued (unless that wasn't an option given her financial situation or something). Might have won.
Andrew Eisen: Should have sued (unless that wasn't an option given her financial situation or something). Might have won.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:00pm
Valdearg: Story about a Male to Female TG who was expressly told she wouldn't be given a job because she was TG. Its not the main point of the story, but explicit, perfectly legal discrimination like this exists.
Valdearg: Story about a Male to Female TG who was expressly told she wouldn't be given a job because she was TG. Its not the main point of the story, but explicit, perfectly legal discrimination like this exists.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:53pm
Valdearg: Lol, I don't know. It may very well be legal to do so. Though that might able to fall under the "race" restriction, depending on how that point is argued.
Valdearg: Lol, I don't know. It may very well be legal to do so. Though that might able to fall under the "race" restriction, depending on how that point is argued.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:51pm
Valdearg: I don't think they do have any legal recourse. I'll have to dig around, but I seriously believe that if the law doesn't specifically mention Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity, they can still be discriminated against in those 29 states.
Valdearg: I don't think they do have any legal recourse. I'll have to dig around, but I seriously believe that if the law doesn't specifically mention Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity, they can still be discriminated against in those 29 states.
Copyright © 2007 ECA. All rights reserved.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Comments
Well, as much as I love my video games, they certainly are a sedentary endeavor, for the most part. Except for the Wii fit. I could lose almost as many calories watching that "Wii girl" video than actually playing the Wii fit.
I think before more children 'go play outside' we need to deal with the 'outside'.
One of the reasons that people turned to video games over the last few decades are the perceived dangers of the 'outside'. Parents are petrified that pedophiles are hiding behind every tree read to snatch thier unique snowflake and thus they have to be kept inside.
Add to this the decreasing number of places kids CAN go that does not require spending money. Even when there are places to go outside, all it takes is one old lady who does not like kids 'loitering' where she can see to call the cops and scare people away from a safe place.
So stop with the child molester scares and provide more free space for kids to go play THEN talk about getting them away from games.
Agree with you 100%. There's so much fear FOR TEH CHILDRENZ now that they aren't allowed to just go out and have fun. I know kids who aren't allowed to go down to their local park by themselves or even out of eyesight of the house, so if Mommy ain't home, too bad.
This is completely anecdotally based so don't take it seriously at all, but it seems like there's also a rise in allergies in kids. I have a feeling that some of this is because of non-exposure to outside because the parents are scared of broken bones, scrapes, and other injuries.
It seriously sucks to be a kid in some ways right now.
"The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation."
- Adolf Hitler in Mein Kampf
Eerily relevant to your comment...
Holy. Shit. He really was a genious. It's so incredibly true. I'm at a loss for words, I've never seen that quote before and didn't even imagine it being from him as I was reading it, but it makes perfect sense...We've said things like it all along: "protect teh childrenz" = votes and unconstitutional legislation...
-If an apple a day keeps the doctor away....what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-
Read "The Prince" and "Mein Kampf". Compare to your government. Shit bricks.
Anyway, on topic, this is just another case of attacking the symptoms and ignoring the problem: kids have nothing to do. Schools have few or no activities, cities are shutting down libraries and community centres, and everything costs buckets of money, with no aid from governments in sight.
But hey, let's ban video games and force kids onto the streets so they can get into all sorts of trouble. In Wurm Online, we have a term for this kind of thinking: Backwards Implementation. Which is also an oxymoron of sorts. Neat.
I would submit that excessive stupidity, your own and being forced to endure that of others Is even more hazardous to ones health (at least mental).
Pity, there was a time I actually liked Obama but alas that has long since worn off. Think frends. What will happen if his government manages to grab more control of the privite sector (which is not so private nowadays). We would all be forced to live by his opinion, and last I checked that was not the way of democracy. He is entitled to his opinion but not entitled to shove it down the throat of others.
What we do in the privacy of our own homes. Um well no, not apparently if he has it way.
Actually... that all went the way of the dodo with Bush. Remember the warrantless wiretapping? The loss a habeus corpus? Etc. etc. The fact that you weren't even entitled to you opinion (if it wasn't in favour of Bush) without being branded unpatriotic (if not a traitor).
Anyhow, this is not a big deal. Obama said that children should be spending less time playing video games and more time outside. He didn't say children shouldn't be playing games at all. I think that's good advice. People need to enjoy the weather when it's nice out. During the winter though... it's all about curling up with my console and PC games.
It's not warrantless wiretapping if they have a warrant. It's called FISA. Look it up before you make yourself look like an idiot. Also, habeus corpus only extends to legal American citizens, because the US Constitution only has legal merit in the United States. Terror suspects picked up abroad do not have the luxury.
Also, are you really short-sighted enough to think that Barrack Obama won't take video games if given the opportunity? He's already taken free speech, the auto industry, our power grid, the banking system and health care in his grasp, why not gaming? That's what Communist Fascits do. They take whatever they can.
Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone's feelings.
Hes Taken Free Speech, huh? So, explain to me why you haven't convienently dissappeared by now? I didn't realize that we also didn't have a power grid? How the hell am I running my Computer??
Protip: Making wild, unfounded claims about how he is going to take over the world doesn't make them true.
Edit: Also, spelling Facists right might boost your credibility.
Thank you, Jedi. I'm not fan of Bush, but whatever Obama does nowadays, people say "Well, Bush did it" as if that excuses it.
But, back on topic, I agree with Obama, but, just like people have mentioned, there's a general... fear against going outside. My mon will talk all about what she usesd to do outside, but she'll call the police before I even get out the door.
I blame the news.
I blame the republicans..
(I kid, I kid! I know they don't have THAT much power! :) )
I blame the democrats, because they don't think criminals really did anything wrong.
Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone's feelings.
I m sorry but your the Idiot. Look up FISA for yourself.
It should also be noted that
Putting aside the bullshit amendments put after the warrentless wiretapping was in place.
Don't you know they don't pay attention to trivial things like the truth?
"That's what Communist Fascits do. They take whatever they can."
Ummmmmm what the fuck? You do realise that Communism and Facism are totally conflicting ideologies right? Perhaps you should "look it up before you make yourself look like and idiot."....... Just a thought.
While the original meaning of 'facist' has been perverted to the point where the commonly accepted meaning has changed - and even some dictionaries now reflect this - the true (original) definition of facism is as follows:
"A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism."
This is not incompatible with communism:
"A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people."
true.
But then Marxism holds the state as an inherent evil. Where as Facism takes the state to be of extreme value.
Also in history Facists and Communists have almost always been enemies.
Actually, what you define as communism is socialism. The fact that your definition even points out that it is simply a step towards a system where all goods are shared equally is the biggest indicator that you've got it wrong. With communism you've already reached the point where there is no such thing as personal property and everything is owned communally, or equally by all. Socialism is just the step between <insert former government/economic format> and the goal of communism.
The USSR was never communist. And China and N. Korea still aren't. They're just run by the Communist Party, who originally had the ideal of reaching communism, but got stuck in the socialism phase of the transition due to corruption and perversion of their ideals over the years. And the fact that communism doesn't scale well enough to handle an entire country. It really only works well with relatively small groups.
As with facism, there are multiple definitions of communism. My definition was the textbook definition of communism as it is practiced today (yes, lifted straight from a dictionary), not the Marxist ideal that has never been achieved.
Videogames? How about office work? Or school? Because games and TV are not the only sedentary activities on Earth.
The cynical side of videogames (spanish only): http://thelostlevel.blogspot.com/ My DeviantArt Page (aka DeviantCensorship): http://www.darkknightstrikes.deviantart.com/
And again, no mention of books.
--------------------------------------------------
I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.
Obama is just Grandstanding with his attempt to use OUR tax dollars for Nationalized Health care and the possibility of a vat tax, soda tax and beer tax. reason why, Obama wants us to go his way or the highway(and pay taxes to fund his vision of a nationalized healthcare(not acting like zerodash here))
Watching JT on GP is just like watching an episode of Jerry springer only as funny as the fights
Obama wants us to go his way or the highway
Because lord knows he's the only politician that acts like that. Amirite?
--------------------------------------------------
I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.
Are you referring to Obama as Lord Art God?
No you d**khead, I'm saying he's just like every other politician going.
--------------------------------------------------
I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.
Goddammit dude, can you stop with your completely insane rants? Every time I read a post by you it's about how the Jews are controlling the world, Obama is a lizardman, and that we're all being brainwashed by the government.
You are a sick person.
Wait, Obama is a lizardman?
Interesting..... lol
I apoligize for my comment, I just don't like obama's policies
Watching JT on GP is just like watching an episode of Jerry springer only as funny as the fights
I think he was replying to NeoKefka. Your comment, although still in the realm of the right, was based on your ideals and what you hear is coming down the road. Kefka's comments are nothing but stupidity and unfounded paranoia..
I especially love how he said that we have to do it now or our current medical care system will bankrupt the country. I had a laugh at that one.
No kidding.
I'd say buying a Twinkie would bankrupt the country, but I'm not irresponsible enough to suggest the federal government be trusted with managing the funds necessary to purchase said Twinkie.
The NHS works pretty good over here in the UK and most of Europe. I really don't get why Americans want to stick with the system you have.
It(like all frivolus legislation) a waste of time and will put us in more debt
Watching JT on GP is just like watching an episode of Jerry springer only as funny as the fights
Because any implementation by our current government would be a complete clusterfuck. It would be burdened by our issues with medical malpractice. The bureaucracy that would pop up around it would be a nightmare. The massive number of people who are activly trying to kill themselves would bankrupt the system
Any good vision would get covered in riders, everyone would try to take their pound of flesh from the legislation, and the end product would be.... bad.
TL;DR we have to many unhealthy people to make it effective unless the government begins taxing and regulating a ton of things that many people don't want to be regulated.
But... what IS so great about the outside? I mean c'mon. Solve the problems we have with gangs, and stupid drivers and maybe I'll go outside more often.
Other than that, I will stay as a defensive/aggressive driver and will continue to carry my sleave knife, and boot knife.
I'll keep my kids inside. I've put my trust in Al Gore who says outside enviroments are getting worse everyday due to globel warming. Protect the kids, buy them games.
You know that science has proven that we are now in a global cooling trend, right? That's why it isn't called global warming anymore. It's called climate change.
Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone's feelings.
Not only that, but all four global temperature records show no warming trend and relatively stable temperatures for the last decade.
It's gotten really hard to ignore, and later hide, these last ten years.
The sad thing is that the media has been going back and forth between "global cooling" and "global warming" since at least 1850. (And there are plenty of archived newspapers for anyone interested in verifying that for themselves). They've reversed positions so many times it'd make your head spin. In the end it's all about selling their product.
The sayings "Fool me once" and "Those who do not learn from history" come to mind.
Oh, and I'd like to add my standard disclaimer that, judging from the geological records, the earth is preparing to go back into another 100,000 year ice age in the next 1,000-2,000 years. Perhaps we should be looking for ways to *cause* global warming, not prevent it.
Glad to know we have stopped teaching basic data analysis and statistics.
Congrats, you've put your trust in a jackass who managed to get 2 journalists arrested in north korea.
(comment deleated)
Watching JT on GP is just like watching an episode of Jerry springer only as funny as the fights
They revealed in a statement that the two of them entered the country illegally.
No shit. Doesn't mean that they weren't there doing Al Gore's bidding. You know, researching the sex trade for him.
Deleted...
I know that you both have the "Conservatism" disease, but I really hope it hasn't clouded your judgement so much that you didn't realize this guy was being sarcastic.. I mean, I guess I can understand Jedi doing something that stupid, but Austin, I thought you were smarter than that..
Oh, I knew he was being sarcastic. I just can't refrain from an Al Gore dig, especially with that setup.
Where is John Mayor with his song "Change" cause Obama sure isn't bringing it.
I love the way people seemed to expect him to be different from any other politician.
--------------------------------------------------
I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.
Well, he brought that reputation on himself. I never expected him to, but there are a lot of idiots who fell for it...
Well of course he did. He was running for President. It happens every 4 years and people STILL act surprised when their candidate doesn't do what he promised.
--------------------------------------------------
I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.
People would actually have healthcare.
I don't see what is so bad about government healthcare. It's something people need, so the government providing it isn't a bad thing. To be pissed that the government provides healthcare, to me, is just the same as being pissed that the government provides a police force.
"People would actually have healthcare."
OMG NOOOO!!!!
Our health care system would suck ass, things would be written off as 'unnecessary' (you should hear some of the horror stories I've got from Canada, France, England, Germany, and many, many more. Especially Cuba), spending would spiral even more out of control, and it would give Obama another excuse to dip his hand into corporations.
That is so interesting, considering I've heard plenty of pretty good stories about the healthcare in those countries too..
Either way, your argument is invalid, considering Obama himself has stated that he wants to model his system off of what we currently have, rather than overhaul it completely, to what Canada or England has..
When you jump to conclusions, it really makes you look stupid..
To be fair, Obama also claimed he didn't want to do anything to the 2nd amendment, but within three months of being in the house, he had already signed a bill trying to vastly slow the production of .223 ammunition (one of the most popular rounds).
Heh, in all technicality.. He didn't do anything to the Second Amendment.. You still have the right to bear those arms of yours.. Just might be a bit harder to find the ammo..
That's like saying I'm not going to tax people with big cars, I'm just going to increase the taxes on larger tires. It's bullshit plain and simple.
Also, his original decision to stop sale of brass to the private sector was overruled by the military and the private sector.
So I just get cheaper, better ammo from my friend who handloads it?
Okay cool.
If the idea of socialized health care is so good, why do people come to America from nations with it? Also, why do the rich people always come to America from these nations for health care? His argument isn't valid, because he has said that he wants to overhaul health care to what Canada or England has. Look up his speeches in Chicago.
Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone's feelings.
People would have healthcare.....
Clearly when the government starts shifting around huge amounts of funding it happens within a totally isolated bubble that does not effect the system that the money is connected to.
Were you guys not listening when he explained what change he was bringing? People began questioning his "change" when he started bringing in all the same old faces that have been screwing over the people for years. He stated that HE was the change. So the only change is a new face in the white house, on your TV and on the news paper. I blame the voters that were foolish enough to trust him. Just wait until he actually goes forward with his legal preventive detention. Sounds a lot like he just didn't like the LOCATION of Guantanamo Bay because he seems to really dig the idea behind it.
Kids don't NEED to go outside and enjoy the nice weather. They shouldn't be forced to do anything except maybe what their parents decide they should do. Yea, sometimes it is a good idea to go outside and play but there is no reason a public representative should be giving parenting advice. Parents should parent their children as they please without interference from government. Obama is not very different from Bush, and I know that will upset many of you but they are both big spenders, they both aren't very concerned about the rights of citizens (see again his preventive detention program) and also consider that many of 'promises' have been forgotten. He didn't even let congress read over the stimulus bill let alone all the people with internet access (Remember when he promised to post all bills online a week before they were signed into law?)
Just wait, the worst has yet to come. I honestly think that video game regulation might be heading our way. All this video game regulation disguised as family/child protection is going to be strengthened and I guarentee you that its going to be more difficult for us to defend against it if you consider the current regulation trends. (See the tobacco regulation currently passed). Tobacco and video games are very different but I'm video games are going to see more strict regulation. I hope I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure we're all going to watch it happen in the next few years.
I think you're right, under the twin guises of 'FOR TEH CHILDRUN' and to 'Stay competitive with China'.
--------------------------------------------------
I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.
Step One: Inform people that a particular thing is causing a problem.
Step Two: Turn that informative platform into a persuasive platform.
Step Three: Watch the public outcry.
Step Four: Provide a "solution" to the public outcry that you've engineered.
Step Five: ????
Step six: Profit?
Replace 'video games' or 'tobacco' with 'firearms' and you'll see what I was talking about during the election.
Tobacco (Cigarrettes) == Scientifically Proven to be a highly addictive, as well as lethal substance. Good target for regulation.
Firearms == Things designed for the sole purpose of killing or maiming the object it is aimed at. Great target for regulation.
Video games == Media designed for the sole purpose to entertain. While rumors exist that they are addictive, it has not yet been proven true. Also, a very high percentage of all laws attempting to regulate them have failed. Not so good a target for regulation..
Tobacco == no disagreement there, but still an individual choice and part of a free market. Not something the government has any real business fucking with. EDIT Also, there has never been data proving that second hand smoke causes cancer.
Firearms == sport shooting is the safest sport in the world, firearms cause far less injury than cars, and, if we remove suicides with weapons (as much as 58% of firearm deaths), cause fewer deaths than alcohol or the flu. Regulation of firearms also leads to *gasp* more firearm violence (Chicago). Also, constitutionally protected. Not a good idea for regulation.
Video Games == and here's where you missed something. You see, one thing these all have in common is they're great 'for the children' bullshit sources. Anytime a politician does anything to any of these three that attempts to limit it, they say its for the children. Pile on top the fact that much of the research politicians are likely to see is that sent up by lobbyists (there's a lot more of theirs than ours), and you have a great opportunity for regulating something to 'keep them chillins safe'.
"Firearms == sport shooting is the safest sport in the world"
Tell that to Dick Cheney
"we remove suicides with weapons (as much as 58% of firearm deaths)"
If you remove killing from war, war causes no deaths
I don't have a point really, but as a Canadian living in a country with extremely low levels of violence (one of the lowest per capita) and where guns are very illegal and gun crimes are nearly unheard of, it's always hilarious watching Americans defend them.
Guns don't kill people, people kill people, right?
Doesn't seem to work that way here..
http://www.canadianlawsite.ca/gunlaws.htm
Wait, firearms are illegal in Canada? Sounds like you're full of shit to me.
Also, one example does not a dangerous sport make.
'If you remove killing from war, war causes no deaths'
And if you continue to make idiotic comparisons, we could all have fun with this stupidity. By its nature, war involves deaths. By its nature, suicide does not involve firearms. If someone's committed to committing suicide, they'll do it whether they can get a gun or not.
And yes, people kill people. For example, an 88 year old asshole the other day killed a black guard at the holocaust museum. A person killed a person.
Fire arms ain't "Very Illegal" in canada, but what do I know I'm just a dum americun.
Ignore Pinworm, he's either not Canadian or an idiot.
Guns are totally legal in Canada, they are just more regulated. Shotguns and non-automatic rifles can be had fairly easily. You just need to take the short course, do the exam, and have a quick psychological test/background check. It's all quite easy to do, cheap, and in most cases, you will hold that license for the rest of your life. Handguns and automatic weapons... not so much. In most cases, you will find it very difficult, if not impossible, to get your hands on these (legally anyway).
Virtually all gun crime is done with illegally owned firearms, with the exception of suicide. Of course, you can't blame suicide on guns, because there are many other very effective ways to kill yourself.
Don't be fooled by some of the uber-left here in Canada, we have a lot of hunters here who know guns and are very skilled with them... and these people just don't kill other humans.
EDIT:
Unless they serve(d) in the military.
Crime is buisness at usual here in Chicago. Meaning, there have been no major increases or spikes in deadly crimes using my observation of the local news as anecdotal evidence. There, I admit it is anecdotal.
GameSnooper
Wow. Gotta love all the gamers getting bent out of shape when someone says something about how playing video games can be bad for your health..
Hate to break it to you, but they can be. Using myself as an example. I am a pretty hardcore gamer. I play video games as often as I can. It used to be upwards of 6-7 hours a day. Guess what? The more hours a day I played video games, the lower my grades got, the less I went out and socialized, and the wider my waistband got.
I am paying HEAVILY for my formerly obsessive gameplay. I now wiegh almost 300 lbs, and am currently attempting to work my ass off to bring that back down to healthy levels. If I hadn't been playing games so often in the past 10 years of my life, but, rather, as Obama states, gone outside and been active, I might currently be a much healthier person.
Games are fine, in moderation. Those of you throwing a Bitch Fit about how Obama is telling kids to go out and be active, as well as study more, rather than play video games, need to take a look at yourselves. Because you are essentially advocating the opposite, which is stay inside and play more video games, so our country can grow fatter and more stupid than it already is.
Also: Gotta love the blatant retarded message
"OBAMARGS GONNA TAKE MY OPINONZ! I DON WANNA BE A ZOMBLARG!!1!"
That all of the Obama bashers are trying to push. OMG he wants to provide affordable healthcare to the 47 million of your fellow Americans that can't afford it!
"What?! He's trying to Help people? PREPOSTEROUS!"
I frequently play plenty of video games/board games/card games. I have yet to be overweight(for my entire life), and I frequently read and study independently. I'm not trying to brag but maybe Obama doesn't really know the source of the problem. I'm pretty certain that it lies within the pathetic education system we have set in place in this country. Allowing states to take care of their own education needs seems like a better and better idea as more federal programs proove to be failures. Time has come to stop throwing money at bad ideas and start looking at some of the solutions that have been infront of us for many years.
I have played games just about all my life. When I was a teen, it was between 2-6 hours a day, more on the weekend. In college, it was between 1-4 hours a day and now it is between 0-1 hours a day.
You want to know at which time in my life I weighed the most? Now. In hish school and college I weighed between 155-170 lbs. Now I weigh 200 lbs.
What changed besides my gaming time? Work. As a teen, I did a lot of work on a small farm. Moving feed. Building fences etc. In college, I worked in a ware house and rode a bike to school and work. Now I work in an office sitting at a computer 8 hours a day. I also spend about 1.5 hours a day driving to and from work. Combine that with the time I spend with my family, I don't have time to be active. So my weight suffers.
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma
Im not saying that everyone who plays games will be fat. I'm just saying that they helped contribute to my current situation. Not everything is black and white, but the fact of the matter is that games do contribute to a sedentary lifestyle. Again, in moderation its fine..
So how many calories were you stuffing down your gullet everyday?
Boy, you are kind of a dumb fuck, aren't you? Im not attacking video games. I'm just saying that they do contribute to a sedentary lifestyle. Yes, my diet wasn't the best, and yes, that also contributed, but sitting on my ass playing video games for every waking hour of my weekend certainly helped in that regard.
If you can't see that all things like that, video games, TV, moves, etc are definately causes of a sedentary lifestyle, then you aren't just fucking ignorant, you are fucking delusional.
They don't cause a sedentary life style. They have no will and they cannot force you to sit on your ass.
Weight lifting, running, biking, martial arts, and sports are not the cause of a non sedentary lifestyle.
They are the results of a society looking for increasingly sedentary activities to fill their time. People choose how they want to live. Their activities don't choose for them.
I work out 4 times a week and run the other 3 nights a week. I play games and watch a little TV. I haven't been made sedentary by those things.
Also, I would suggest chilling out, I only asked you the same question I've asked anyone who blamed anything but themselves for their weight gain.
First of all, you fucking piece of shit.. Don't tell me to chill out. You asked me that question in a very offensive manner. So offensive, in fact, that if you had been standing in front of me when you said it, I would have put you to the ground.
I know video games didn't CAUSE it. It was my decision to play the games, nobody elses. What I was trying to say is that when Obama was saying "Put down the video games" he is really saying make healthier choices and go get active. It seems like the people here are going "AMIGAWD! HES TALKING BAD ABOUT OUR VIDJA GAMES!!" which is totally incorrect.
I am the product of a lifetime of choosing video games over socializing, studying, and exercising. If video games didn't exist, (Not that I'd ever want them to go away..) I might be a healthier person. They are not the direct cause, but their existence has contributed to who I am today, for better or for worse.
Obama isn't trying to help anyone, but the far-left zealots who helped get him elected. In the five months he's been President, he spent more money than Bush Jr. did his whole presidency. Who's gonna pay for that? Not him, that's for sure. On top of that, he'll be telling entire industries what they are supposed to pay their employees (even companies that didn't ask for a bailout). I mean, he's already fired people at companies he claims he doesn't want to run. He then gets people who haven't even graduated college, much less know how a car runs, to run the car companies.
You wanna suck Barack Obama's dick, fine. Don't tell me I'm an idiot because I don't want to.
Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone's feelings.
I'm going to tell you you are an idiot whenever I damn well please.
Obama is not anywhere CLOSE to as bad as you right wing nutcases think he is.
Yes, he spent a metric fuckton of money. I am not going to argue that point. However, he did it in order to attempt to help the economy, and *gasp* signs show that the economy is starting to heal. So, what, are you angry that he helped bring an upturn to the recession caused by your good buddy Bush Jr and helped America? Kind of unamerican of you, isn't it?
Yes, he has ownership stakes in several private firms across the country, which was unheard of in America previous to that. I am also not going to argue that. However, these companies were failing, and the bailout money helped to save them. Combine that with the fact that these companies were failing because of the deregulation on the markets, it seems to make sense that the government keep a tight leash on them for the time being. There is no evidence that suggests that he won't loosen the reins down the line, when the whole American economy kind of depends on these companies not screwing up again.
Your fears are unfounded and either the product of greed, if you happen to make more than 200k a year, or stupidity, because you don't seem to see that he is attempting to help the country, even if 48% of them are putting up more of a stink than is necessary.
[Edit] Given your comment later in the article about how he is going to "turn this country into a Communist nation," I almost feel like I kind of wasted my time in this comment, seeing as you are so willing to show your complete ignorance of all things political the very next time you commented..
You are truly an idiot.
I love how we keep saying that people who make more than 200K a year are greedy. If I work hard, I don't see why my money should go to welfare skanks and people who do nothing and contribute nothing. Also, consider, with Obama's added tax ideas (VAT, etc.) I'll end up paying far more than 50% taxes.
As for the stimulus helping the economy, bullshit. Take the banks for example. People keep saying 'oh man, they're paying back the stimulus money already because they've already stabilized!'. That's a half truth. They're paying the money back, but not because they're stable; because they're sick of the bullshit Obama slapped on them
By the way, if doctors and hospitals don't like the idea of socialized medicine, they're probably right on the ball.
"If I work hard, I don't see why my money should go to welfare skanks and people who do nothing and contribute nothing. "
Lets examine this phrase without the Republican attempts to cover thier true feelings.
"If I work hard, I don't see why my money should go to [People who might be a bit down on thier luck] and people who [weren't quite as fortunate as myself, growing up, so they didn't have the same oppurtunities I did]."
And there you have it. Greed at it's finest.
I beg your pardon? Welfare Skanks are people 'a bit down on their luck?' Not a chance. They're people who decided rather than working, they'd breed children, then, instead of taking care of them, use the stipends on themselves. Those are the people you see with 12 different colored children, the mother wearing expensive flashy crap while the children don't have shirts or shoes. Those are people who dedicated themselves to laziness, not people hard on their luck.
As for defending people who do nothing, I have an address you should visit in Ohio, from which you can see everything wrong with our welfare system (or at least you could, back when we were conducting research from it). You had people taking their welfare money and spending it on their cars (one individual had a 100,000 dollar car [parts included], but his children had no food), robbing everyone who came through, basically the worst place you could imagine. Do you know what these people contribute? Nothing. Do you know what they pay in taxes? Nothing. Do you know what they cost the government? Thousands a year at least, each one. When did it become a country where you could get something for nothing??
And by the by, I'm here because I worked hard, not due to simple luck or being 'fortunate' growing up.
"Those are the people you see with 12 different colored children, the mother wearing expensive flashy crap while the children don't have shirts or shoes. "
Holy Crap, man. Can you be any more racist? I mean, Im frigging WHITE, and I am offended by the sheer ignorance there...
Getting to keep what you've earned through your own efforts isn't greed. Giving to those less fortunate is a nice thing to do, but it should ultimately be your choice. It shouldn't be indirectly mandated by the government through heavier taxation, for example.
"De minimus non curat lex"
What is so ignorant? Communist health care, a Communist welfare system, a Communist auto industry...It's not my fault that you're so blinded by self-hate for being white that you don't want to see it.
You are right about no evidence that he won't loosen the reigns later on, but you don't bother to explain why he would. He is telling companies that HAVEN'T taken TARP money how much they can profit, and how much they can pay their employees (ALL employees, not just executives). He is telling Ford what kind of cars they HAVE to make, even though they didn't take a cent from the Government. He has hired people that don't know dick about cars to run car companies. Not to mention that the bailout money hasn't saved any of them. Chrysler and GM both still had to file bankruptcy, which was what the bailout was meant to avoid. TARP was supposed to firm up the banks, but they are saying that the banks still won't be able to sustain themselves. President Obama himself has said his programs are unsustainable, yet he wants to spend more money on them.
How is any of this, out of Obama's own mouth, conservative slanted? He's an idiot, and you're too blind to see it.
Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone's feelings.
Nope ur too busy sucking retarded conservative dick in your log cabin gay gangbang.
Seriously, are you that stupid? I m critical of everything and anyone.
Bush Spent: $11.5 trillion
Obama's planning to spend:$3.69 trillion
And Bush didnt have an economic melt down. Sure he had 9/11 and the war in Iraq. But well, Iraq was his own god damn fault. Of course a conservative dick sucker like yourself will not believe so.
But then in Obama's spending 410 billion dollars are for TARP which was implemented before he got into office. Honestly if you believe in laz faire economics to the T, the company should have been let to fail. But Bush started an stimulus plan with TARP and Obama is following closely to the New Deal. I really want it to work but I have my doubts since the New Deal backed mainly manual labor where these back white collar operations and services.
Also he is not telling how to pay the employees, just the executives which I see no problem. Ever since the enron, exxon, white collar crimes, and my own experiences I do not see a problem with executive's pay being cut. I have worked in jobs where they literally screwed me over in pay. Watching my bosses by new computers and new cars while they were forcing me to work 12 hours or more days. I ended quiting the job in the middle of projects. Dont know how they are doing now but I hope they suffer dearly. Why should only executives get a cut if the company does good? I put my time and effort, I did the work, where is my cut? The company made 200,000 in one month well I worked 80 hour weeks to make that money where is my cut? So sorry If I did a crappy job cuz you treated me crapply and gave me crappy pay.
I think your numbers are slightly off... maybe you confused what Obama is SPENDING with the DEFICIT he'll gain in two years. He's managed to more than double our deficit in a year, quite a feat.
The Fed is telling companies how to do all sorts of things. What cars to make (GM was a prime source of SUVs, but under their 'new leadership' expect to see small 'fuel-efficient' cars that no one will want to buy, like the smart car, which is going to quickly become uninsurable, seeing as an accident at walking speed in a smart car causes more damage than the car is worth after driven off-lot), what benefits to give, what to give in to for the UAW (one of the worst unions in the country), the list goes on and on. And It'll destroy GM. It's as bad as selling the Hummer line to China. That was a smart move.
I love people who complain that they don't like their entry level job. And if you start and quit in the middle of projects, you're going to make yourself unemployable. Here's a tip; no one wants someone who's a quitter. If you want to make money, A) stick with something for more than one project, B) open your own company (if you have the knowledge and expertise, which you probably don't) or C) go win the lottery.
I suggest you check you facts.
Here are my sources on spending:
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/StockInvestingTrading/cos...
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/04/20/obamas-spending-vs-obamas-spending-c...
Where are yours?
as for the cars lets see now I see there is lots of demand maybe you dont want to buy but then from all those post I have read you only think about ur self.
http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/business/stories/2009/06/11/honda.h...
There is demand for smaller fuel effcient cars stated here and here
http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSN0127917320080702
how about here
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/13/business/global/13prius.html?hpw
http://business.theage.com.au/business/prius-gives-toyota-that-feeling-a...
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-13746_7-10249269-48.html
http://www.reuters.com/article/bigMoney/idUS334951385120090615
http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/2009/06/15/lack-of-insight-hon...
Sorry but I m not unemployed matter of fact I m earning nearly 1.5 times more than my last job, working less hours, and getting double the benefits. Sorry to burst your bubble but your stupidity is showing.
By the way get into MIT yet?
Analysts say Honda can stage a recovery, partly because it has a strong motorcycle division. Honda has less excess production capacity in Japan, and has a better lineup of small energy-efficient models than its competitors, they say.
"Honda's earning power is proving resilient," said J.P. Morgan analyst Takaki Nakanishi. "Honda is reaping the benefits from the speed and diligence with which it is matching its corporate structure to the changing business environment."
Kondo -- who has worked for a decade in the U.S., about a quarter of his 40-year career at Honda -- acknowledged that staying nimble was a challenge as Honda grew. What it needs to remember is its roots as a tiny newcomer in the U.S., he said.
Note the phrases CAN, IS PROVING, etc.
Prius sales in the United States, which soared last summer as gasoline prices topped $4 a gallon, fell sharply along with gas prices during fall and winter. But it is still the company’s third-best-selling car, behind Camry and Corolla.
Huh. Strange.
Despite the Prius' strong start, Toyota, the world's largest car maker by sales, predicts more red ink this year. The company said last month it expected global sales to decline 14 per cent in the year to March, weighed down by sluggish sales in North America, its biggest market. But strong Prius sales could help Toyota surpass its initial, dismal global sales goal of 6.5 million cars this year. As recently as 2007, Toyota's global sales topped 9 million vehicles.
Did you even read these articles? I only glanced through, but it looked like they were talking about how they were fearful that with lower gas prices (one of the driving forces behind the purchase of priuses), less car purchasing, and the availability of non-hybrid cars that didn't guzzle gas, they wouldn't have as strong a year as they did last year.
Yes they said they were going to red line but that wasnt the topic at hand. You brought up the demand for smaller cars and said there was none. Now your changing to how well cars sales are doing as a whole.
Nice Try but Epic Fail
Edit: Fixed the last sentence, was cut off
2 things.
1) I was talking about those damn smart cars (reread my original post). Of course, I'm more than happy to include Priuses, because they're garbage. 0 to 60 in 12 seconds plus change? My goodness, what shit!
2) With gas back down to 2.40 nationally, the demand is gone. Why was there demand? Because gas was over 4 bucks, and that adds up quick when you have to gas up your SUV or car. Unless gas shoots back up (and with the way that the fed's been working lately, it wouldn't surprise me), the prius is going to have a bad year. For example, one of the articles mentioned that this year there were 40,000 pre orders or reserves for the new Gen 3 Prius. In comparison, in 2007, there were 7 million cars sold by toyota, and the Prius was at the top of the list.
In closing, shhhhh.
in closing your still a dumbass. I have backed up each of my arguments with evidence while you have none.
If you bothered to look at the dates for the articles you will see that they are current. Majority of the articles I have posted were written in JUNE 2009 matter of fact some of them are written TODAY. So the gas prices have dropped, for now, but there is still demand for smaller fuel efficient cars as proven by these artcles.
Also if you know anything about the car business, car sales working in approximately 7 year cycles. No one goes out to buy a new car every year and even if those who have the money to do so buy luxury brand cars and do not care about gas mileage.
Where is you proof? I have yet to see anything besides stupid wildly drawn conclusions.
Well, for the above comment, the proof came from the articles YOU provided, jackass. Also, many of those articles talked about how well the Prius was doing in JAPAN, not AMERICA.
The articles mention america as well. but your known for cherry picking your facts.
The article mentions how the Prius performed last year. Not how it's going to perform THIS year, without high gas prices to motivate people to purchase or lease them.
yes because we all know how good predicting the furture works.
Where is your evidence? Oh wait thats right you have none.
Nothing but hot air.
Once again, the evidence is actually in the articles you posted, most of which said that while prius sales were doing great in Japan, they feared they would be losing money in America. Maybe you should actually read the full article, instead of just posting things that say 'prius' in the topic on here.
I m still waiting on any evidence that SVUs, big cars, and gas guzzling cars sales are up.
Oh wait you got none.
Same for the spending evidence
Same for everything else
So stop talking out of your ass. Seriously your argument can be summed up like this:
Austin_Lewis as a lawyer: "The defendant is Guilty"
Judge: "Where is your evidence"
Austin_Lewis: "I dont have any fingerprints, dna, photographs, video surveillance, eye witnesses or a confession but I got Jack Thompson and Jack said he did it."
SUV car sales aren't up either. 4 door, non 'fuel efficient' model sedans have an increase in sales. At no point did I say SUV sales were up.
However, the demand for the prius and cars like it continues to fall, and those articles you posted but apparently didn't care to fucking read talk about how they're afraid they'll be selling fewer priuses than before. Hell, many of the articles even note how the sales of priuses seem to coincide with retardedly high gas prices.
You're either lazy or absolutely retarded.
One again where is your evidence?
And here is mine this time I will pull some quotes from the articles since you are too lazy to read.
The car industry as a whole is down
http://www.motorintelligence.com/m_frameset.html
Once again where is your evidence?
As far as cars are concerned, open up an issue of Car and Driver.
Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone's feelings.
yeah.. Remember when you told us to read FISA and I did and you were WRONG
Your studity and ignorance is showing. If this is how Repblicans act no wonder why they are sterotyped as retarded and Stupid
How was I wrong? Nice how you backed up what you said with facts.
Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone's feelings.
Are you really that brain dead? Cant you read? I already posted it once on this thread. Here is the posting again for you.
I m sorry but your the Idiot. Look up FISA for yourself.
It should also be noted that
Putting aside the bullshit amendments put after the warrentless wiretapping was in place.
Now where are your facts?
I don't know what you read, but the way I read this, wiretapping terror suspects is totally legal. Since nobody who has been reported as wiretapped did not already have physical evidence of connection to terrorist activity (making them a member of a foreign power), the FISA warrents are valid.
Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone's feelings.
wow I didnt know you really that ignorant. I m surprised you dont know the basics of the US judcial system when Law and Order, CSI, The Closer, and the multiude of police / law enforcement drama is on the air.
Here is the bottom line:
Congress passed a law in 1978 making it a criminal offense to eavesdrop on Americans without judicial oversight.
It doesnt matter what evidence you have. If you dont have judicial approval you cant eavesdrop. Thats not including the 4th amendment violations.
Need more proof?
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/50/usc_sec_50_00001809----000-.html
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00002511----000-.html
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/1216-01.htm
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2006/01/b1389573.html
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/lazarus/20051222.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/23/AR200512...
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forumy/2006/03/nsa-eavesdropping-and-fourth-a...
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/18650
http://www.intelligence.gov/0-natsecact_1947.shtml
Now where is your proof that you dont need approval? Or even evidence in some cases.
See, you are still missing one big issue, there..
CONSERVATIVES ARE SO DETACHED FROM REALITY THAT THEY THINK THE TRUTH DOESN'T APPLY TO THEM.
No matter how much evidence you give them, they will still continue down thier ignorant, retarded path.
Your diet was probably utter shit.
I love all the complaints here. I mean, how dare he suggest that we'd be healthier if we exercised more. I mean, it's not like America's got an obesity problem... oh wait.
I do agree with some of the comments here, though. Saying we should all play outside more is kind of a no brainer. Some effort towards giving children good places to go play would be more effective.
It's also the fact that a lot of gamers (stupidly) like Obama, and he's trying to lay groundwork to regulate (control), if not completely destroy (like the car companies), our industry.
I've been saying since he got on the national scene that he's going to make this a communist nation. What makes video games so special that he isn't going to try and destroy them too?
Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone's feelings.
One worst case senario is that he'll nationalize all Media(including our industry) in the near future if he's hellbent on doing so(right now he's Completely screwed up the car industry by Partialy nationalizing the car companies)
The other Worst case senario is a possibilty of what cavoto(yes. I'm quoting a fox(Business) news Guy here)said a "fat" czar(Would obama quit naming people czars at the same time he's trying to quit smoking dope)
other than that the only option I'm possibily seeing here is the "fat" czar may happen instead of the Nationalizing all media part
Watching JT on GP is just like watching an episode of Jerry springer only as funny as the fights
Of course he's going to name them Czars. He's closet Communist.
Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone's feelings.
You do realize that the communists were one of the groups that helped bring down the Czars...
You know you're just as bad as the idiots who claimed the last guy was going to try to be president for life?
No, I take that back; you're worse than them. You'd rather be as hateful as possible and wish for grand failure at any cost to Americans because your side lost.
Hannity and Coulter would be proud.
I don't want America to fail. It's just that my vision of America is different than yours. I want people to take responsibility for their own actions, instead of blaming white men for all of their problems. I want the federal government to stay out of my life. I want to keep the money I make. I want America to have the best education, knowing that can't be achieved by taking a child's feelings about his or her grades into account. I want our industries to be the best in the world, knowing that can't be done if the federal government is actually running them with people who don't know anything about that particular industry. I want America to be energy independant, which means having access to wind, solar, nuclear, coal and fossil fuels, all of which are accessible here on American soil. I want America kept safe from terrorism, which means not being "nice" to people that want America to burn.
How is any of this wanting America to fail?
It's not my fault that Barack Obama wants nothing to do with any of this. He'd rather become friends with terrorist nations and bankrupt the country.
Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone's feelings.
Obama was boo'd many times at this event
I'm sure you did your best.
--------------------------------------------------
I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.
I'll be honest, I can't really fault him for his stance. Yes, today's youth are too sedentary. And tech toys like tv and video games are a huge part of that. Games aren't the villan, though, and I don't think he's saying that. He's just saying, turn the damn thing off once in a while. And don't let your children grow up with Mario as their babysitter.
Hey, as long as he doesn't go off on the typical "violence and sex" arguements, I'm going to leave him to his views.
I believe that if kids are going to go outside, parents need to be there so THEY know how to be safe.
Their parents can help them to be safe outside.
I feel that parents are too busy to simply look after their own children sometimes, and that is MORE of a problem for most parents who have two working parents.
So it is always important to have a scheduled day off to spend time with their kids. Also to give parents 2 weeks off during the school holidays so they can go on family vacations.
So if I was Obama, I will try to promote that into the working structure and encourage companies to start going those sorts of things like some of them do for workers with disabilities.
Jesus fucking christ.
All the dude said was encourage your kids to spend some time outside. What the fuck is wrong with that. Comsidering your one of the most obese nations in the world maybe there is an element of truth. It's not like he's saying video games are the devil or anything.
And Jedi and Austin need to chill the fuck out out. I don't have time to go into it all. But Jedi communism and facism are two completly seperate conflicting ideologies, what you said was just dumb.
Austin, I don't give a fuck what you say people who earn of 200k a year are greedy. Ok maybe not if they give it all away to charity or something. The point is no one needs over 200k a year when people are starving. Plain and simple. Sure you earned it and 'worked hard' but fuck it, unless you give most of it away to people who actually NEED stuff like I dunno FOOD, then yeah your greedy.
Gosh this site makes me so angry sometimes.
The doctrine of "only what you need" is bullshit and destructive.
My mother doesn't need a mammogram yearly when other people are starving to death.
People don't need to live past their productive years into retirement when all their assets could be used for more productive purposes. Hell they tend to be a drag on the health care system. Think of all the food that old people waste. Imagine all the poor starving children you could feed with it.
You don't need your computer, your internet connection, your chair, your plumbing,or the food you bought at the store.
You don't need to live past the subsistence level, but you do you selfish little fuck.
And as long as I realize that I don't really care when people like you get their panties in a bunch.
Was there any point to that statement?
Well the point was really that it was over 200k, which is enough to live comfortably.
And yes your right to a point, I am selfish and thats not a good thing, im not perfect. That doesnt change the fact of the matter though.
When you begin using the doctrine of need, it doesn't matter how much you make or how much you give away. Its never good enough for those in charge.
I'm sorry you don't like the fact that I work hard to make money so I can do the things I want to do and provide the life for my family that I want them to be able to live. Thankfully, I make far more than 200k a year. By the way, before the change in tax law, I was able to give about 200K to charities. Under the Obama tax code, I will give nothing to charity; before, I could get a tax deduction for it, now I can't.
If people need money for stuff like food, why don't they do some damn work? I know couples who survive off of 800 dollars a month (and 600 of it goes to housing!) Why should I pay for those who choose not work? Why should I pay for the skank who won't close her legs, then abuses her children? Why should I pay for the trash who simply refuse to take part in society?
On another note, why shouldn't I strive to live a better life if I wish to put in the work? Because your teachers told you we're all equal? So you don't feel bad that you make nowhere near what I do because you flip burgers and I have my own consulting company? Yeah, go fuck yourself. If you don't want to strive for a better life for yourself or your family, fine. But don't give me this bullshit about 'greedy'. You don't like it? Go fuck off to a commune, where everyone 'shares'. Jackass.
Wow, what a great human being you are - "I won't help others because it doesn't benefit ME more than them".
And you wonder why republicans are considered the party of hatred.
"Down with capitalism! It's a system that only benefits the greedy! Booo! Hiissss! ... so, hey, can you give us money? We haven't done jack shit to earn any, so we'd like a hand-out please. You still suck, though."
And you wonder why democrats are considered societal barnacles that want people that have done absolutely nothing to earn anything to receive everything. I assume Mr. Lewis would like to donate to charities that actually help people that ARE unable to work and can't get by on their own... instead, a good bulk of that money is being given to, well... societal barnacles that have done absolutely nothing to earn anything.
And his being able to receive a tax deduction is not benefiting him MORE than charities receiving his money. More than likely, it's biggest help is to keep the cycle going so he can continuously donate. Yeah, what a bastard...
Master_E hit it right on the money.
A) I know what the charities give to and how the money is spent. I can also, often on demand, look at how the moeny will be spent, based on how its been spent in the past. I can also put into things like scholarships, or decide who receives my money, instead of watching teen skanks who can't close their legs spend it on themselves while neglecting their children.
B) The tax deduction allows me to keep giving money to charities without needing to worry about changing my budget. It also allows me to contribute every year, regardless of how the year goes for me.
C) The great thing about giving to charities is that, unlike government programs, when the charity's programs are failures, they're quickly ended. Otherwise, I can take my money to a different charity that has some success with whatever the subject is.
D) Yes, I love how the same people who hold out their hands for free stuff seem to constantly be trash-talking educated people and people who make money. They hate capitalism, but it pays for their sloth. Hilarious.
Thank you so much for proving how hateful and bitter the current republican party has become. That reply of yours fit the description almost perfectly. I dare say Ann coulter would be quite proud of you for that display of spite and anger for someone who dared to disagree with you.
Thats quite a nice way you belittle the lower class asa whole as parasitic welfare abusers too. Given how much bitterness you have towards people outside your pwn party it no wonder you've been getting your asses kicked in elections since 06. Given the pattern of kicking out and/or belittling sll the moderates in your party, its growing more and more likely that a viable third party will form, rise up, and take power sooner than you get any back, and most people wouldn't even have a problem with that.
But you go ahead and continue to call your sitting president the second coming of Hitler, the man who is single-handedly destroying our country, and blaming him for everything that goes wrong in your miserable lives from stubbing your toe on up. you certainly haven't amped your persecution complex up enough yet.
First of all... I'm not the one that's posting replies to every little sub-section of comments on this article trying to toss my near-sighted hate at anyone I perceive to be <insert party here> because they have a difference of opinion with me... you are. As a matter of fact, that is exactly why I replied to you. I simply felt like defending Austin_Lewis against your holier than thou rhetoric.
Secondly? I'm not a republican. I just happen to believe that what you said in your last post was utter bullshit. That's all. :)
Right, so you defend the guy who takes any opportunity he can get to bash democrats, but you have a problem with the guy who calls him out on it. Sound logic.
I also didn't realize that posting less than half a dozen times in the entire topic to equate to "posting to every little subsection of comments".
Nice projection btw of anyone who disagrees with austin or republicans in general to be automatic liberals. The only things I have in common with them is that after eight years of being called a traitor and terrorist sympathizer by republicans over any difference of opinion whatsoever has made me put those people at the bottom of the barrel politically and as human beings, and I couldn't be happier that they're out of power.
But you go on ahead and keep defending the known partisans - its very "independent" of you.
Well, I don’t see where I’ve called you a democrat, exactly. The only reason I even mentioned democrats was because you made such a broad statement on republicans… I figured one good stereotype deserved another.
As for the situation with Austin…you made a rude, hateful statement about how he decides to give HIS money to charity. It pissed me off that YOU were being such an ass. So, I spoke up.
Make no mistake. Right now I really don’t have much an issue with any political party. In this thread? I simply do not agree with your political views... and you can't handle that. ;P
Excuse me, but he openly admitted that he was going to give absolutely nothing to charity because it doesn't benefit him. He made the decision and blames Obama for it, as if he makes his decisions for him now. I happen to find that, and his stereotyping of people on the receiving end to be hateful. He posts hateful comments in just about every Obama thread that gets posted here, but thats all honky-dory, right?
So Obama gives good advice and us gamers chalk it up as a bad thing. Even though I play games and excersise, you guys as gamers know that games can be addicting.
Playing games late into the night have made me late for a class or two in college... same with girls, but you know gaming excessively can make one gain weight.
http://www.vgshuffle.com
Games aren't evil, but evil people play games.
No eating more calories than your lifestyle requires will cause you to gain weight.
Ahhh these comments are fun. :) Everyone sounds off about how wrong ignorant politicians (or wannabe politicians) are about how bad videogames are for people and how no one should speak ill of them in the name of 'The Children'... until the O-Man speaks up. Then a select group of people go, "Guys, guys! GUYS! You just don't get it... he has a point! I mean... I'm a total fat-ass! It's all true! And all the kids I see are fat little bastards, too!"
Anyways, when you look at the statement 'Too much gaming can cause health problems.' the key words in there are 'too much'. Perhaps videogame boxes should come with 'nutritional facts' that give a 'serving size' and whatnot... then again, when you consider the fact that many people tend to ignore suchs facts on bags of Oreos and other delicious treats... *sigh*
Personal responsibility... it's a bitch, huh?
Someone's getting it.
http://www.vgshuffle.com Games aren't evil, but evil people play games.
Its funny when Bush-worshippers post irony without realizing it.
Bush-worshiper? Hardly. In fact, I think of Obama as simply being two Bushes duct taped together. In other words, I really don't have a very high opinion of either of them.
Mr.Pat, you are terrible at 'reading' people. Please stop trying.
Oh I disagree, you're very much like the people I deal with elsewhere who claim to hate both parties equally but only bash democrats while defending republicans. You've certainly made a habit of doing that today. I have no problem admitting I consider democrats to be a step up from republicans; they aren't much better, but its a step in the right direction from eight years of crap. I'm willing to give them a chance, unlike some people here who judged some of them to be failures after a whopping four days.
Oh darn... you're right. I forgot. When it comes to Obama, criticising ANYTHING he says means that you're 'bashing' him. I'm truly sorry, Mr.Pat. Sometimes I forget we have different standards for Obama.
I mean, that has to be why you consider me to be a democrat basher, right? It couldn't simply be that you've decided that based upon this one critique I've had of Obama, and my one counter of democratic stereotyping to your, "Republicans are the party of hatred." statement earlier, right?
Different standards? I'm giving him the same amount of time to prove himself and the same benefit of the doubt on his decisions that I gave the last guy before him. How is that giving him different standards?
I consider you a democrat-basher because of your firm defence of one of the most bitter partisans visiting this site. You certainly didn't bother to go after someone else stereotyping Obama to be a socialist and a communist, so why shouldn't I think that? As for my "party of hatred comment", as long as the people on freerepublic think torture to be fine and dandy, call the Tiller shooter and the church shooter before him national heroes, admiring hatemongers like Ann Coulter and Sean Hannity as patriotic Americans, throwing people out of their party who aren't 100% lockstep with them, wishing for a sitting presedent to fail regardless of the cost on our country, and wishing for a terrorist attack to happen on his watch to have their positions justified, my point stands.
Point goes to Mr.Pat.
Master_e (The Conservative Moron trying to masquerade as a Moderate, HAH!), has been shut out in every sense of the word.
GG, guys, GG..
Ahh... name calling. Very mature. You spoke of bitterness, Mr.Pat?
Whoomp!... there it is. ;)
In any case, why should I rag on republicans in an article that only focuses on things said by Obama?
I won't deny it. I am bitter. I don't like conservatives.
They are actively standing in the way of turning this deeply flawed society into something better.
They think its ok to descriminate against people because of thier Sexual Orientation.
They also think its ok to capture, torture, and kill innocent civilians of foriegn countries, because hell, they aren't American.
They also think that constantly claiming at the top of thier lungs that AMERICA IS TEH BESTZORES! is the only way to communicate with foriegn countries, and that anyone who doesn't agree can just deal with the business end of our military.
Finally, they also think that its ok to let a kid suffer and fail right off the bat in school if he isn't smart enough to keep up.
Screw attempting to help EVERYBODY in a society. Lets just make sure that everyone who has the means is sucessful. Fuck everybody else, no matter how much or how little they deserve it.
Oh my freaking god I can't read any more of the comments. A large group of you all are idiots when it comes to these sorts of politics. Obama sucks. Bush sucked. Both are doing bad things for the country. Bush stripped away social liberties and Obama is fiscally fucking up the country. That's it. Deal with who you've voted in. Done. I'm all for a revolution when someone starts it, because we're long overdue for one.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." - United States Declaration of Independence, 1776
-If an apple a day keeps the doctor away....what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-
Careful! The government might drag you away for your double-plus ungood thoughts.
(or for being a military veteran, or a Christian, or pro-life, or conservative... shame on you, you horrible terrorists. SHAME!)
You are a fucking idiot.
The DHS report was right on the money.
Look at the Holocaust Museum Shooter, the guy who killed that Tiller guy, as well as the Pittsburgh Cop Shooter.
Each and every one of them were right wing crazies. They all committed terrorist acts. These acts are actually happening faster than I can ever remember in the past.
Granted, I was 10 years old in 1997, but still..
Yeah, they were right-wing crazies, that's why they both hated Fox News and the RNC, right? No, they were both just crazy. Stop trying to blame people you don't agree with for everything that's wrong in the world.
Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone's feelings.
From what I have read on here take your own advice
"I'm all for a revolution when someone starts it"
Wow, so brave! You're a true armchair patriot!
Tell you what.. You go ahead and start that revolution. You will end up just like so many of the crazy "patriot" assholes in the past. Either dead or in Jail.
The bottom line is that we now live in what SHOULD be a civilized society. All of this bitching and whining when it comes to people vs. politicians is quite literally because they lose thier election.
Keep in mind, Im not accusing you of being a republican. I'm just saying that since you seem to hate both sides equally, you obviously feel like you aren't really being represented.
Unfortunately, thats the consequences of a 2 party system. Only the fringes and the absolute middle aren't very well represented. However, like I said before, to revolt would be suicide, and really, really stupid.
It's hilarious watching people try to twist an innocuous statement like "kids are spending too much time inside playing games these days" into a condemnation of video games as a whole, or foreshadowing for some sort of "imminent" draconian media censorship policy.
Hilarious and scary, because I realize that so many of you are of voting age.
People are too polarized these days. Some people absolutely hate the President, and so they assume that anytime someone agree with him, they must be brainwashed fanatics bowing and scrapping at his feet. To some, you must either love him or hate him and everything he says, unconditionally.
They're also polarized about video games. You should say only positive things about them, always. And if you even casually link a negative to video games in any way, well, you must hate games and are plotting their downfall through legislation.
So, nevermind that the only message that Obama is trying to to convey is, "Hey fatty, try moving once and a while, and make sure your kids don't sit there all day, either. You're killing yourself and costing the health care system millions." He's not calling for a ban on games. He's not saying that games are too violent, or that they make you go insane. He's saying, being too sedentary is bad for your health, so go do something.
Yeesh, what an evil bastard to care if our children are healthy...
You know, it help if a lot of schools weren't cutting recess in middle school and lower, the cuts to PE programs certainly doesn't help either. Nevermind the utter garbage still being served for lunch in many schools to go along with it. Nevermind highschool.....
This. Not to mention music classes. But we need to make sure that they take sensitivity training.
Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone's feelings.
If it results in less douchebag pricks like you walking the halls of thier highschool calling everyone "faggot" and beating up anyone who happens to be different, then god damn, bring on the sensitivity training. It is people like you who are fucking up this country. People like you are why the rest of the world is finally getting SICK and TIRED of America's cocky motherfucking attitude and the way we act like we are head and shoulders over the rest.
NEWSFLASH: America has problems. We have one of the least healty societies among industrialized countries. We have more gun violence and violent crimes in this country than most "Civilized" society. Racism, sexism, and Discrimination against gays runs rampant throughout our country.
And it is people like you, who choose to ignore or make these problems worse, that are the ruining this country. It is a small miracle that you and your retarded bretheren have been booted from power, and one can only hope that it remains that way for a LONG motherfucking time.
Jedidethfreak, please, please, tell me you read newspapers, and have done so for more than the first 100+ days of Obama's presidency?!?
"It's not my fault that Barack Obama wants nothing to do with any of this. He'd rather become friends with terrorist nations and bankrupt the country."
Bankrupt the country? Oh, you mean necessarily had to bail out the banks and the auto industry (which had become a bloated, unrealistic business - look what GM did to the electric car). He's trying to fix everything the least popular Preisdent on record (Dubya, just to be clear, in case you've not read that either) has screwed up. Not to mention inheriting the sham of a war in Iraq thanks to "WMDs" that never even existed!
I particularly like your "I want to keep the money I make. I want America to have the best education..." said in practically the same breath, despite being completely contradictory! Tell me, what would pay for the "best education" if not taxes, some of which necessarily *have* to come from the money you make?
But the best of all? People have, time and again, pointed out ways in which you have been utterly, utterly wrong. Not points about your opinions, but FACTS. And you don't even take it on board! You just steamroller on through. Your sig says
"Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth."
Well, you might want to look up the word truth sometime.
"I want America kept safe from terrorism, which means not being "nice" to people that want America to burn."
Actually, it doesn't mean that at all. Did you ever ask why some people want America to burn? I'm not saying they're right (more often than not, far from it) but to not even question this, to just mentally stonewall any possibility of the fact that like an individual, a nation can also make mistakes from time to time, speaks of a frighteningly closed mind. Then again, you'd just call me a pinko liberal, right?
I'll leave you with a real question though, because of all your statements and references to facism, this one stuck out to me the most - "I want people to take responsibility for their own actions, instead of blaming white men for all of their problems."
So, by 'people' there, given the rest of the sentence after the comma, you mean, non-white men? So, my question is this...
Are you for real?
While I agree it could be a factor to sedentary lifestyle, one sould not rule out the factor of sedentism vs sedentirization. Where are nomadic peoples supposed to go once the world has been conquered? They're to go exploring and creating alternate, virtural realities.
Until we reach the age of space exploration, the term "sedentary lifestyle" could be both an oxymoronic misnomer and a potential misdiagnosis.
I say the solution is to develop a more physical and immersive way to interact with these "new worlds" we create... until we can explore the actual ones that exist in physical space.
Nice Post.
(I have of late, but wherefore I know not, lost all my keys...)
One of the reasons that people turned to video games over the last few decades are the perceived dangers of the 'outside'. Parents are petrified that pedophiles are hiding behind every tree read to snatch their unique snowflake and thus they have to be kept inside.thanks for the info.. regards, health reviews