Controlled Chaos

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Mar 22, 2011 -> 01:21 PM) Already had two co-workers jump on the deal, too, so yours makes three and now I get it for free... which is even cooler. I have no idea how that works and if it'll actually work, but I'll let you know! In that case...here's my link to use now for any others interested. https://livingsocial.com/deals/30020?ref=co...amp;rpi=8610777

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Mar 22, 2011 -> 11:13 AM) Yeah, I jumped all over it. Make sure to use that link. ah so if we use your link, you get one of your deals free. I used it so good luck.

Mama's got a squeezebox, Daddy never sleeps at night!

QUOTE (FlaSoxxJim @ Mar 22, 2011 -> 10:01 AM) Add me to that list. I can't read these stories without emotionally breaking down and that feeling has multiplied exponentially since becoming a parent. Me as well, especially when you have a child near the age as the victim.

Hawks look absolutely horrible. Not only on the goals against, which they do look pathetic, but in every f***in phase. Jake Dowell won his fight, but other than that horses***!!

Old, but I just saw it for the first time. I'm sure it looks great in the mirror!

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Feb 26, 2011 -> 12:54 PM) Nooooooo! Not the guido douchebag! I must be missing something here.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 01:21 PM) I suggest HBO's Rome and Starz's Spartacus. I just recently started The Wire, as I never watched it back in the day when it was on HBO. Finished season 1 last night. It was definitely solid. Starting season 2 tonight. Spartacus is like a kick ass action movie with a side of porn. I haven't seen season 1, but I was flipping around one Friday night about a month ago and got hooked. Tonight is the season finale.

Happy Birthday!!

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Feb 16, 2011 -> 02:30 PM) Do you want to do some 30 min cardio-type exercises at home? You could probably get a very good strength/conditioning workout at home in 30 min with about 6-7 moves if you really dedicate yourself to timing your workout, and giving it full effort. If you have additional materials like some free weights, or stability ball, that would help as well. Yeah. The only reason I started going to the gym is my company is paying for a corporate membership to the one that just opened up in my building. It was a one time $10 charge for me and that's it....kinda too good to pass up. Plus it forces me to take an hour lunch, which I never used to do. I would just sit at my desk through lunch and still take support calls and the like. So anyway, I always used to work out at home. I have free weights and a stability ball. I ditched my bench when I moved though.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Feb 16, 2011 -> 10:27 AM) Yes, as I said, you will always burn more calories if you work harder. But the question is, why would you want to burn muscle under any circumstances, unless you were a wrestler or a fighter and needed to make weight or something? I certainly don't want to burn muscle. I basically have a decent build under the 12 pack I developed. I just want to lose the gut. When I'm in that "fat burn" mode, it's like I'm not even working hard...hardly even sweat. It's almost like trying to walk super slow....it's awkward. Rock I could use some new exercises. I like the elliptical because it uses both my arms and legs. I can see burned calories and it's way more than I got on the treadmill. Also, it is a nice fit time wise. The weight loss program on there is like 35 minutes which is just about the time I have for it on my lunch break. I can do some different stuff at home, like crunches or what not.

This is something I found online about this "fat-burning" zone. It makes sense to me. Let's do the math. Suppose on Monday, you use the elliptical trainer machine for 60 minutes. You stay within that target heart rate that correlates to the fat burning zone. You burn a total of, let's say, 200 calories. I choose 200 here arbitrarily, just for mathematical purposes. Everyone's metabolism is different, and calorie readouts on machines are based on an average-height, 150 pound male. You may be a 5-2, 170 pound female. So keep in mind the mathematical concept here, rather than how many calories your particular body might burn up in 60 minutes. So, you burn 200 calories in 60 minutes in the fat burning zone. Now, about 50 percent of those calories will be fat. 50 percent of 200 is 100. Remember that: You've burned 100 calories of fat. Now, let's say on Wednesday, you get on the same machine, but train in the cardio zone. You pedal faster at a higher pedal resistance. You drip sweat. You hear yourself breathing hard. You huff and puff. After 60 minutes, you've burned 300 calories. In cardio zone training, about 40 percent of the calories burned will be fat. Note: 40 percent is a smaller number than 50 percent. HOWEVER...what's 40 percent of the 300 calories that were burned? It's 120! Your total fat-calories burned were 120! This is 20 percent MORE fat burned, than what you did in your fat burning session on Monday!

I have a question. If I am on an elliptical machine, trying to lose weight, and the target heart rate progress bar has categories marked: warm up - fat burn - cardio - max. Do I need to stay in that "fat burn" category? It feels like I'm not even working hard there. I hardly break a sweat. When I'm in the cardio/max category, then I feel like I'm working and burning some real calories. Basically, I think it would take me like 45-60 minutes to burn the same amount of calories I do in 30 minutes if I ignore that "fat burn" zone and just go at it. The question is, is that hurting my weight loss? It seems silly to me that a less intense workout is burning more fat.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Feb 15, 2011 -> 03:48 PM) I agree with him, and I clicked on the thread because I read pretty much every thread But yeah, I don't get why guys still buy the swimsuit issue, or even why they watch certain shows because one or more of the actresses are hot. I never bought the swimsuit issue in my life. Someone had posted a link on facebook, I clicked the link...saw the bachelor chick pictures and posted it here for discussion. Yes, I know there are better things to jerk off to on the internetz...that wasn't my reason for posting the link. I was just bringing some hotties here, since the "S" in SLaM is pretty much non existent.

QUOTE (3E8 @ Feb 15, 2011 -> 03:31 PM) As someone who watches the Bachelor, I have to tell you that whoever shopped her photos should get editor of the year. Same thing with every photo in every mag...but I think she's hot on the show too.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Feb 15, 2011 -> 03:16 PM) The swimsuit issue became pointless to me when I got the internet. Then why'd you click a link titled SI Swimsuit thread?

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011_swimsuit/models/ For my money....this chick from the bachelor is hotter than any of the professional models.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Feb 15, 2011 -> 08:44 AM) I liked the 2nd episode of Chicago Code a lot. It looks like they are going to smartly build in alternate “cases” along with the big one of busting the Alderman. The acting is still a bit much, and the chick’s Chicago accent is way overdone, but it’s decent. The show really could write itself. There are so many real life situations that can be applied, it can almost be a documentary. It's just there's only so much CPD can do about political corruption. Let's move her after a couple seasons to run for Mayor and all that goes along with an election. Then a couple seasons of that. Then to governor. There's an inordinate amount of material and the term "Chicago Code" can be applied to any elected office. The one thing that gets me about the show is the "Irish mob" WTF?? Were there more Irish looking actors out of work or something??

Lucky dude. Cool story. http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_...?urn=nfl-319633

Congrats Bren!! All the best in the future!!

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Feb 10, 2011 -> 03:06 PM) The people who vote on the awards for television and film seem to really love straight actors who play gay characters, but not gay actors who play gay characters. I'm not offended by it, but it often seems to me that straight actors playing gay characters usually come off as really flamboyant and effeminate. I feel like it's almost an insult and I'm not sure why gay rights people don't get up in arms about it. They also seem to love gay actors that play straight characters...NPH, Cynthia Nixon, TR Knight...at least those are the gay actors we know are gay. Will from Will and Grace wasn't flamboyant, but the Jack character was. The doc on Grey's Anatomy is gay..she isn't flamboyant...I think there was another doc that was gay and not flamboyant, but she's off the show. I don't know the more you dig, I don't see that as the case. Flamboyant is funny though...I don't think it's insulting, but maybe Rex speak better to it. The chick from Flashforward was a non flamboyant bad ass FBI agent.

Kudos to some well articulated arguments in here. Regardless of who I agree with, I can appreciate people taking the time to speak their mind.

QUOTE (Tex @ Feb 10, 2011 -> 01:45 PM) I agree, but it would seem weird getting back a citizen who may have left the country decades earlier and hasn't paid taxes all that time. My brother in law has been living in England and other countries for over 20 years. If England sent him here for a lifetime of care, it would seem weird, but he maintains his US citizenship and I guess that makes him US responsibility. I know little to nothing about it, but I thought you still had to pay taxes even if you live abroad?