Atman questions

[franksolich]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10028189112

Oh my.

Atman (29,787 posts)     Mon Sep 26, 2016, 04:07 PM

Two 70 year olds trying to stand up for 90 minutes without a bathroom break.
 
Who is sponsoring this debate? Depends and Hover'round?

Just up, new post, no primitive comments yet.

But if I were Atman, which thank God I'm not, I wouldn't worry.

I mean, I wouldn't worry about the (R) candidate.

The other one, sit back, wait, watch, and see if I'm not right.

[USA4ME]

So someone who wants to be the leader of the USA can't hold their peepee for 90 minutes?

Poor Pedro.

.

[67 Rover]

I wonder if we will be able to tell the difference between Hiliary relieving herself into her Depends during the debate or just having another creepy chameleon eye movement thing.

[Carl]

Has not been a problem before.

[franksolich]

As sure as the sun rises from the east every morning, Atman managed to offend:

Raven (11,312 posts)      Mon Sep 26, 2016, 04:21 PM

6. You could be a little more respectful of seniors.
 
Not funny and BTW, I could probably run circles around you, mentally and physically without the Hover'round. No question HC could!

^^^the Bostonian Drunkard's mother.

[Carl]

As sure as the sun rises from the east every morning, Atman managed to offend:

^^^the Bostonian Drunkard's mother.

Especially if the old battle axe was running for a booze bottle.

[franksolich]

Has not been a problem before.

My gripe is, why does the debate start at 9:00 p.m. eastern time.  Why not a more reasonable earlier time?

I can fully understand holding it at the time most convenient for those living in the eastern time zone, because that's where the majority of the population lives.

I lived in the eastern time zone once, and could never figure out why things started so late.  For example, Dan Rather never came on until after supper, when it always seemed more reasonable to have him coming on right after one got off work, and before one made supper.

And "prime time" started at 8:00?

Given that most people in the eastern time zone have to waken at absurdly early hours to make it (commute) to their jobs--I for example used to have to be up at 5:00 a.m., to make it to my 8:00 a.m. job--it seems to me the news should be at 5:30 eastern time, and prime time starting at 7:00 p.m. eastern time, so that people can hit the sack early enough to get some sleep.

Given the nature of this debate, it should start at 7:00 p.m. eastern time--suppertime here, but that's okay--so that people can get to bed in time.  I'll bet that if people in the east had a chance to be in bed and asleep by 10:00 p.m. (eastern time), a whole lot of ailments and other disorders would diminish, and the intake of pharmaceuticals plummet.

[Ralph Wiggum]

My gripe is, why does the debate start at 9:00 p.m. eastern time.  Why not a more reasonable earlier time?

I can fully understand holding it at the time most convenient for those living in the eastern time zone, because that's where the majority of the population lives.

I lived in the eastern time zone once, and could never figure out why things started so late.  For example, Dan Rather never came on until after supper, when it always seemed more reasonable to have him coming on right after one got off work, and before one made supper.

And "prime time" started at 8:00?

Given that most people in the eastern time zone have to waken at absurdly early hours to make it (commute) to their jobs--I for example used to have to be up at 5:00 a.m., to make it to my 8:00 a.m. job--it seems to me the news should be at 5:30 eastern time, and prime time starting at 7:00 p.m. eastern time, so that people can hit the sack early enough to get some sleep.

Given the nature of this debate, it should start at 7:00 p.m. eastern time--suppertime here, but that's okay--so that people can get to bed in time.  I'll bet that if people in the east had a chance to be in bed and asleep by 10:00 p.m. (eastern time), a whole lot of ailments and other disorders would diminish, and the intake of pharmaceuticals plummet.

Frank, I've thought about that too.  Since I've lived my whole life in the Central time zone.  Almost seemed like it was an afterthought...tonight, following CBS football, 60 minutes at 7 pm. 

Granted, and I did the research on this ages ago... roughly the US time zones go as follows by population.  50â„… Eastern, 30â„… Central, 15â„… Pacific, 5â„… Mountain & others.

Certainly there must be updated figures.  But that explains that bit of it.  And the media center is all East Coast.

[Patriot Guard Rider]

My gripe is, why does the debate start at 9:00 p.m. eastern time.  Why not a more reasonable earlier time?

I can fully understand holding it at the time most convenient for those living in the eastern time zone, because that's where the majority of the population lives.

I lived in the eastern time zone once, and could never figure out why things started so late.  For example, Dan Rather never came on until after supper, when it always seemed more reasonable to have him coming on right after one got off work, and before one made supper.

And "prime time" started at 8:00?

Given that most people in the eastern time zone have to waken at absurdly early hours to make it (commute) to their jobs--I for example used to have to be up at 5:00 a.m., to make it to my 8:00 a.m. job--it seems to me the news should be at 5:30 eastern time, and prime time starting at 7:00 p.m. eastern time, so that people can hit the sack early enough to get some sleep.

Given the nature of this debate, it should start at 7:00 p.m. eastern time--suppertime here, but that's okay--so that people can get to bed in time.  I'll bet that if people in the east had a chance to be in bed and asleep by 10:00 p.m. (eastern time), a whole lot of ailments and other disorders would diminish, and the intake of pharmaceuticals plummet.

In the same vain, I wonder why the NFL doesn't do away with the Thursday night game and have 2 Monday night games. One that starts at 6 p.m. eastern for the east coast and one that starts at 9 for the west coast. I don't watch it simply because I'm in bed early cause, you know, work the next morning.

I miss the NCAA championship football game, the NCAA basketball championship. All that crap. All to cater to the west coast.

[franksolich]

Frank, I've thought about that too.  Since I've lived my whole life in the Central time zone.  Almost seemed like it was an afterthought...tonight, following CBS football, 60 minutes at 7 pm. 

Granted, and I did the research on this ages ago... roughly the US time zones go as follows by population.  50â„… Eastern, 30â„… Central, 15â„… Pacific, 5â„… Mountain & others.

Certainly there must be updated figures.  But that explains that bit of it.  And the media center is all East Coast.

Remember, my objection isn't that everything's based upon eastern time; that's eminently reasonable, because that time zone has the most people.

My objection's based upon that things seem to start s-o-o-o-o-o-o late, eastern time, that it interferes with any hopes of leading a healthy life, getting eight hours of sleep a night.

Whoever contrived 8:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. eastern time as "prime time" (rather than the more reasonable 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.), obviously had nothing but the destruction of the human race in mind (by forcing people to stay up later than what's healthy, and we all know sleep deprivation's very unhealthy).

[franksolich]

In the same vain, I wonder why the NFL doesn't do away with the Thursday night game and have 2 Monday night games. One that starts at 6 p.m. eastern for the east coast and one that starts at 9 for the west coast. I don't watch it simply because I'm in bed early cause, you know, work the next morning.

Uh huh.

I miss the NCAA championship football game, the NCAA basketball championship. All that crap. All to cater to the west coast.

Right; **** California.

California's got nice weather; why else the Hell should they have more than that?

[franksolich]

dixiegrrrrl (47,008 posts)    Mon Sep 26, 2016, 05:27 PM 

35. Age-ism much?
 
A lot of us here are Hillary's age. And able to stand for long periods. 

Atman (29,791 posts)    Mon Sep 26, 2016, 05:35 PM

38. Facts much?
 
I don't care how old you are...90 minutes. Maybe you gotta pee. But 70 year olds? Standing? I'm pushing 60. No big deal. But it would be nice to know that I could go pee. I guess part of debate prep is "don't drink coffee or water or anything."

Ridiculous you'd get your knickers in a twist over this. 

For the record:

the (R) candidate: born 1946
Messalina Agrippina: born 1947
Methuselah (the old sourassed sourpuss): born 1941
Atman (Robyn McGrath); born either 1958 or 1959 (not sure which one)
Raven (the Bostonian Drunkard's mother) born either 1944 or 1946 or 1947 (not sure which one)
the Bostonian Drunkard himself: born 1971
California Peggy: born 1942
Big Mo: born 1952 or 1953 (not such which one, but probably the latter)
the sparkling old dude: born 1946
the sparkling old dude's trophy wife (his second): born 1957

I hope this helps keep a perspective on primitives.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

My gripe is, why does the debate start at 9:00 p.m. eastern time.  Why not a more reasonable earlier time?

I'll be watching The Amazing World of Gumball.

[ChuckJ]

My gripe is, why does the debate start at 9:00 p.m. eastern time.  Why not a more reasonable earlier time?

I can fully understand holding it at the time most convenient for those living in the eastern time zone, because that's where the majority of the population lives.

I lived in the eastern time zone once, and could never figure out why things started so late.  For example, Dan Rather never came on until after supper, when it always seemed more reasonable to have him coming on right after one got off work, and before one made supper.

And "prime time" started at 8:00?

Given that most people in the eastern time zone have to waken at absurdly early hours to make it (commute) to their jobs--I for example used to have to be up at 5:00 a.m., to make it to my 8:00 a.m. job--it seems to me the news should be at 5:30 eastern time, and prime time starting at 7:00 p.m. eastern time, so that people can hit the sack early enough to get some sleep.

Given the nature of this debate, it should start at 7:00 p.m. eastern time--suppertime here, but that's okay--so that people can get to bed in time.  I'll bet that if people in the east had a chance to be in bed and asleep by 10:00 p.m. (eastern time), a whole lot of ailments and other disorders would diminish, and the intake of pharmaceuticals plummet.

I usually head to bed at 10 regardless of what's going on because I have to get up and start my day between 4 and 5 AM.

[franksolich]

I'll be watching The Amazing World of Gumball.

It's just really stupid to start it so late.

And by hapless random chance, I have to be up early in the morning, to go to a distant city for a cardiological examination.  I'm not going to be a happy patient if I don't get hardly any sleep.

[franksolich]

I usually head to bed at 10 regardless of what's going on because I have to get up and start my day between 4 and 5 AM.

Yeah.

I do that too, "regardless of what's going on."

Of course, it means both you and I miss out on a lot of things that would better happen a couple of hours earlier. 

[SVPete]

9 PM EDT = 6 PM PDT.

I'm over 60 and was on my feet continuously for well over 4 hours Saturday, without a bathroom break; not sure I used the bathroom for another hour and a half after finishing the race, either (despite drinking a half gallon or so, as well). Maybe "Atman" has personal plumbing problems?

[BadCat]

I wonder if we will be able to tell the difference between Hiliary relieving herself into her Depends during the debate or just having another creepy chameleon eye movement thing.

That was the "shimmy" they were talking about.

[SVPete]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5mLjZRAXRRA[/youtube]