Digest for rec.sport.tennis@googlegroups.com - 24 updates in 11 topics

Wednesday, May 24, 2017

stephenJ <sjaros3@cox.net>: May 24 01:05PM -0500

On 5/23/2017 7:32 PM, Court_1 wrote:
>> picking on stef like that?"
 
>> "Court 1: First of all: a)men can talk about how unattractive they think women or men are all of the time but I don't hear a peep from you about THEIR appearance when THEY do that, b) I really don't think Graf is attractive at all, in fact I find her quite unattractive in the face, always have and I am not alone on that one, and, c)yes, I am cute. :) "
 
> Ok, but as I said above I would describe myself as cute to maintain some modesty. If I said I was pretty how > would that go over? I'd sound like Whisper.
 
It would go over fine, if you posted a pic to prove it. Otherwise, it's
not to be taken seriously.
 
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
soccerfan777 <zepfloyes@gmail.com>: May 24 11:17AM -0700

On Tuesday, May 23, 2017 at 8:01:03 PM UTC-5, *skriptis wrote:
 
> > What about Tilden, Budge, Perry? Seems reasonable. I would push Stimpy to Tier 3.
 
> I would push you off the cliff.
> --
 
Trying to be funny for the very first time? pretty lame... try again.
"Pelle Svanslös" <pelle@svans.los>: May 24 02:50PM +0300

All presidents fudge the numbers. But this one represents a new level of
deception.
 
Today, the Trump administration released a plan to balance the federal
budget over the next decade, and it's no more plausible than my plan to
become LeBron James. It does reveal the administration's fiscal
priorities, like deep cuts in spending on the less fortunate and the
environment, no cuts to Medicare or Social Security retirement benefits,
steady increases in spending on the military and the border, and an
abiding faith in the restorative miracles of tax cuts for corporations
and well-off families. But its claim to a balanced bottom line is based
on a variety of heroic assumptions and hide-the-ball evasions, obscuring
trillions of dollars' worth of debt that it could pile onto America's
credit card.
 
It is tempting to dismiss the Trump budget because so much of it seems
unlikely to become law, but it's still a revealing window into the
administration's priorities. And just because a budget is declared "dead
on arrival" does not mean it won't influence the budget that eventually
emerges on Capitol Hill; Trump's budget may envision larger cuts than
Republican leaders want, but it reflects many of the priorities that
House Speaker Paul Ryan has included in his budgets in the past. It
ought to be taken seriously if not quite literally, to borrow the cliché
about Trump.
 
It just shouldn't be taken as evidence of fiscal rectitude or a deep
aversion to debt, which isn't really what Trump is about. It looks more
like a plan to cut taxes for the rich and spending on the poor, while
covering up the effect on the debt by flagrantly violating Washington
norms. And that's exactly what Trump is about.
 
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/05/23/trump-budget-scam-215183
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: May 24 07:56PM +0300

Pelle Svanslös kirjoitti 24.5.2017 klo 14:50:
> covering up the effect on the debt by flagrantly violating Washington
> norms. And that's exactly what Trump is about.
 
> http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/05/23/trump-budget-scam-215183
 
Kinda flawed article.... Talking about Trump when in reality this is
basic Republican agenda they're pushing. Very short sighted to blame
Trump on this. If you criticize, blame the Republican congress.
 
Sort of OT, but another thing that annoys me and which media constantly
gets wrong is "Flynn lied to Pence"... when Pence in fact has been
important part of the coverup himself, lying to the media about Russia
issues non-stop..
stephenJ <sjaros3@cox.net>: May 24 12:55PM -0500

Why does a European care about Trump's budget? Screwy.
 
 
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Gracchus <gracchado@gmail.com>: May 24 07:15AM -0700

On Wednesday, May 24, 2017 at 3:02:50 AM UTC-7, TT wrote:
 
> Bonds seem to live quite old, despite the hazardous occupation.
 
> Olivia de Havilland will turn 101 in a week. Kirk Douglas the same in
> December.
 
And Norman Lloyd will be 103. Not as big a name, but also a good actor who used to play tennis with Charlie Chaplin every week and kept at the game until he was 100. Lloyd was in Hitchcock's "Saboteur" (1942). I nominate him for the next Bond so he can make it at least to 110.
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: May 24 05:10PM +0200


>> Olivia de Havilland will turn 101 in a week. Kirk Douglas the same in
>> December.
 
> And Norman Lloyd will be 103. Not as big a name, but also a good actor who used to play tennis with Charlie Chaplin every week and kept at the game until he was 100. Lloyd was in Hitchcock's "Saboteur" (1942). I nominate him for the next Bond so he can make it at least to 110.
 
And Gardnar
Mulloy?
1913-2016
 
He had a fan around here in rst if I remember but can't remember
who it was.
 
--
Gracchus <gracchado@gmail.com>: May 24 08:38AM -0700

On Wednesday, May 24, 2017 at 8:30:03 AM UTC-7, *skriptis wrote:
> 1913-2016
 
> He had a fan around here in rst if I remember but can't remember
> who it was.
 
Mulloy played Bond?
Guypers <gapp111@gmail.com>: May 24 09:25AM -0700

On Wednesday, May 24, 2017 at 10:15:12 AM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
 
> > Olivia de Havilland will turn 101 in a week. Kirk Douglas the same in
> > December.
 
> And Norman Lloyd will be 103. Not as big a name, but also a good actor who used to play tennis with Charlie Chaplin every week and kept at the game until he was 100. Lloyd was in Hitchcock's "Saboteur" (1942). I nominate him for the next Bond so he can make it at least to 110.
 
Vijay A was in Octopussy with Moore!
stephenJ <sjaros3@cox.net>: May 24 12:53PM -0500

On 5/24/2017 5:02 AM, TT wrote:
 
> Bonds seem to live quite old, despite the hazardous occupation.
 
> Olivia de Havilland will turn 101 in a week. Kirk Douglas the same in
> December.
 
If they don't die young of fast living, successful actors tend to last a
long time because let's face it, it's a relatively easy life.
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
grif <griffin_230@hotmail.com>: May 24 06:12PM +0100

On 24/05/2017 10:43, TT wrote:
 
> Yeah... where is 'English Patient II: The Return of Brain Damage' or 'Age of Innocence II: The Lost Virginity'?
 
> But don't worry, Fast and Furious 10 is coming to theaters near you...
> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5433140/reference
 
"It's been a long day without you, my friend .."
http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/features/how-fast-furious-took-over-the-world-20150406
PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com>: May 24 06:06AM -0700

I have been wondering for long time why the crowds were crazy about Roger and happy to see him beating Sampras even Roger wasn't the famous Roger he became later.
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: May 24 11:55PM +1000

On 24/05/2017 11:06 PM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
> I have been wondering for long time why the crowds were crazy about Roger and happy to see him beating Sampras even Roger wasn't the famous Roger he became later.
 
Because the tennis fans in England are true tennis fans & understand the
game. They knew Sampras was far more talented than Federer & could beat
him in his sleep.
 
Federer beating Sampras is similar to Doohan beating Becker at Wimbledon
- a colossal fluke, 1 in a million etc.
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Gracchus <gracchado@gmail.com>: May 24 08:15AM -0700

On Wednesday, May 24, 2017 at 6:55:51 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
> him in his sleep.
 
> Federer beating Sampras is similar to Doohan beating Becker at Wimbledon
> - a colossal fluke, 1 in a million etc.
 
Except that Doohan didn't go on to win 18 slams afterward or even 1. A troublesome little detail that easily debunks "fluke" theory.
PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com>: May 24 12:32PM -0400


> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> http://www.avg.com
 
I agree that they understand tennis but I think they were happy to
see a long clown era finally coming to an end.
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: May 24 06:40PM +0200


> I agree that they understand tennis but I think they were happy to
> see a long clown era finally coming to an end.
 
 
 
Even if Sampras had won everything due to playing in clown era,
that era could only become more clownish once he retires or
declines, and another fine player replaces him.
 
So you realize your post is neither funny, neither provocative,
but simply illogical and dumb?
 
 
 
 
 
--
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: May 24 11:40PM +1000

On 24/05/2017 9:30 AM, bob wrote:
 
> tough thing to have happen for the UK. and i'm sure ariane grande's
> fans are predominantly 10-16yr olds. very sad.
 
> bob
 
Also sad that it had to be at an Ariane concert as she will take a long
time to recover & has cancelled her world tour.
 
Pity it wasn't a Bieber concert instead, or perhaps Rolling Stones - the
victims would have been bogans & older people.
 
* ok may be in poor taste & 'too soon', but last bit was a joke.
 
 
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: May 24 08:39AM -0700

Yeah blame the girl! Blame the girl! It's not generation snowflake's fault!
soccerfan777 <zepfloyes@gmail.com>: May 24 09:55AM -0700

On Wednesday, May 24, 2017 at 8:40:53 AM UTC-5, Whisper wrote:
 
> Pity it wasn't a Bieber concert instead, or perhaps Rolling Stones - the
> victims would have been bogans & older people.
 
> * ok may be in poor taste & 'too soon', but last bit was a joke.
 
Horrible Joke. Too bad it didn't happen to one certain The Police fan.
SliceAndDice <vishalkn@gmail.com>: May 24 09:18AM -0700

Svitolina is a nut job? She is young and really seems to have come into her own this year.
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: May 24 11:33PM +1000

On 24/05/2017 6:58 AM, TT wrote:
 
>> FF
 
> Too late. First impeachment then impalement.
 
Followed by chemical castration so he stops slapping women on the pussy?
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: May 24 02:35PM +0200

> surrounding countries?
 
> In particular the situation in Croatia as described in:
 
> https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/01/20/croatia-asylum-seekers-forced-back-serbia
 
 
There is not so much of a situation here, those people only passed
and were passing through our countries, the whole migrant wave
stopped (for the moment) because Germany is full and has to
regroup before accepting more.
 
It's ludicrous to suggest millions of Arabs, Africans decided just
like to that to go to Europe. The signal and impetus for this to
happen came from Merkel. That she'd welcome them (and that
decision is anti-German imo, which I don't care. But also
anti-European because affects us all since we're a union and I
care about my country)
 
When she gave the signal not just Syrians, but Iraqis, Pakis,
Afganis, Africans, both Arabs and Blacks, embarked on their
journey.
 
It's a huge criminal endeavour by EU, which knows very well that
these people travel using services of human traffickers who earn
millioms if not billions and who btw have protection/turning a
blind eye, by European and national authorities.
 
There's a Balkan route, but there are also "humanitarians ships"
who travel all the way to African coast, Libyan coast and
intercept smuggler boats full of thousands of blacks and "save"
them. Instead of returning them to african shores where they
picked them up, they bring them to Italy. Those people coming
from African countries who pay smugglers aren't even the poorest
Africans because all of them had to pay couple of thousands of
dollars.
 
It's a mafia business worth billions.
 
 
 
And you have TT, here, a total political imbecile, blaming Putin
for that. Kinda forgetting that the wave started in summer 2015,
while Putin started supporting Syria against terrorists in autumn
2015.
 
 
 
 
 
> If I understand you. Putin is a counter force to the German influence,
> correct?
 
No. I don't gave hopes with Trump, because he, just like Putin,
can't reason European leaders who are degenerates. It's about at
least someone doing what's right.
 
 
 
> knew it would be this effective when the change was introduced. It
> strikes me that the Euro was largely a French creation?
 
> Shows some of the silly hyperbole about supposed German hegemony.
 
 
There is definitely a Germany hegemony, every empire, union, and
EU is that, existed only as the most powerful entity within it,
or a core, benefited from it. It's a fact. E.g USSR collapsed
when Russians stopped wanting it, British empire when sustaining
it became more of a burden, than a source of profit, etc.

 
So I don't have a problem with German economic hegemony, if
they're better off 50% with EU, and the rest are better off 25%,
It's still better than 0% for both parties.
 
But being in charge means you have grater responsibilities. They
fail terribly there. With their bullying of other people and
countries they're braking down the EU. Brexit didn't happen for
no reason.
 
They imported third world scum to their own country, which
technically they shouldn't be allowed. They're not totally
independent country anymore. With all us being in the union. If
they give citizenship to those people, it means they can travel
to any other EU county so it's something that should be discussed
on a EU level. And it wasn't.
 
We wanted Europe without borders for Europeans to travel easier
and to grow economy. We didn't want t to have to worry about
jihadists coming into our country with German passports.

 
But it goes even worse.
 
Not only have they welcomed them and created security, demographic
and existential problems for their nation and culture, and
indirectly to everyone else in Europe, but Merkel is pushing for
other countries to do exactly the same.
 
She wants to welcome even more, redistribute those stuck in Italy,
so that every EU country becomes "multicultural", "diverse" and
"vibrant".
 
This is more than terrorism, which, however bad it is, is not such
a performing threat. Losing 100 people annually won't kill us.

 
But multiculturalism will.
 
 
<http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/05/22/germany-created-migran
t-crisis-pay-consequences/>
 
<https://sputniknews.com/europe/201705221053865875-poland-eu-migra
nts-refugees/>
 
<https://www.therebel.media/_watch_polish_patriot_s_video_supports
_government_better_to_pay_than_take_migrants>
 
 
Sorry for the links if it fail.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
--
Brian W Lawrence <brian_w_lawrence@msn.com>: May 24 01:17PM +0100

"Home Secretary Amber Rudd has said she is irritated with the US for
releasing information about the Manchester bomber before UK police would
have liked.
 
Ms Rudd said the British had wanted to control the flow of information
to "keep the element of surprise".
 
She told BBC Radio 4's Today programme she had been very clear with
Washington "that it should not happen again".
 
"Information about the bomber's identity first emerged in the US - with
American TV networks CBS and NBC naming Abedi as the suspect.
 
Ms Rudd was asked whether she would be looking at how information
sharing may have resulted in the premature release of details the
British police and security services had not wanted in the public domain.
 
The home secretary told Today: "Yes, quite frankly.
 
"The British police have been very clear they want to control the flow
of information in order to protect operational integrity - the element
of surprise - so it is irritating if it gets released from other
sources, and I've been very clear with our friends that that should not
happen again."
 
Pressed on whether the Americans had compromised the investigation, she
said: "I wouldn't go that far, but I can say they are perfectly clear
about the situation and that it shouldn't happen again."
 
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40026413>
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
"Pelle Svanslös" <pelle@svans.los>: May 24 02:06PM +0300

Moving past the headline numbers - $1.7 trillion in spending cuts,
massive reduction in the long-term for social safety net programs, and
increased defense spending - many economists and political analysts
observed that the most striking part of the Trump budget is just how
many assumptions it makes.
 
One of the biggest assumptions the Trump budget makes is that US GDP
growth will hit 3% - and stay there.
 
Mick Mulvaney, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, told
reporters Monday that such an assumption would not be out of reach,
pointing to the long-term growth rate of the American economy since
World War II.
 
The last time the US economic growth was above 3% in a year was in 2005.
The country has not had two consecutive years of GDP growth of more than
3% since 1999 and 2000, in the midst of the tech bubble. Mulvaney said
annual GDP growth since 1948 has been 3.2%. But the average is 2.6%
since 1980.
 
Other complications toward the 3% assumption include the Federal Reserve
hiking interest rates, labor productivity remaining low, and structural
factors such as an aging population, which all amount to headwinds
toward economic growth.
 
Double counting tax cuts
 
The Trump administration says the 3% GDP growth will also help to
balance the federal budget over the next 10 years. But that conflicts
with statements the Trump campaign has made about its plan for tax reform.
 
The Trump administration has argued that its tax cut plan would be
revenue neutral because of the resulting economic growth. It has also
argued that the economic growth from tax cuts would help balance the budget.
 
Put another way, say all current taxes and outlays are set at a baseline
of $0. Trump's tax cuts, the administration says, would nominally
decrease revenue and bring the deficit from the baseline to -$100. Based
on the White House's statements after the tax plan was released, they
would argue the growth from the tax cuts would get the US back to $0.
 
The administration is saying the tax cuts will not only pay for
themselves, but also earn the country enough to make up the deficit.
Essentially, what they billed as a revenue-neutral tax plan will now
evidently be revenue positive.
 
"This is a mistake no serious business person would make," Summers said.
"It appears to be the most egregious accounting error in a presidential
budget in the nearly 40 years I have been tracking them."
 
Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal
Budget, also took issue with the apparent double-counting in a statement
Monday.
 
http://nordic.businessinsider.com/trump-budget-fiscal-year-2018-gdp-assumptions-tax-cuts-2017-5?r=US&IR=T
 
I hope bob is not involved.
You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to rec.sport.tennis+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

0 comments:

Post a Comment