Digest for rec.sport.tennis@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 9 topics

Tuesday, June 6, 2017

bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jun 06 08:55PM -0400


>He has a daughter in school who wants to stay in DC. How horrible! Lol
 
she's out of school in june. he said he was moving to california. he
lied. he wants to stay around DC for political reasons. very bad form.
 
>Presidents have to buy huge houses--half is taken up by secret service. Bush bought two houses side by side...
 
i don't care how huge it is. i think it's bad form to stay in DC after
your term is up, you did your 8 yrs. step aside now, the other guy won
like it or not.
 
bob
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jun 06 08:56PM -0400


>I doubt his physical presence means much of anything. At any rate, do
>you want and expect Trump to fade into the wordwork like a good little ex-
>president when he's out of office? No more tweeting, etc?
 
hell, can't keep trump in DC a wknd as it is. but yes, if he
criticized the next president or butted his nose into it, it'd be very
bad form.
 
bob
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jun 06 08:57PM -0400

>> successor is doing, or even on public events more generally.
 
>Trump is going to be THE WORST when it comes to that, I suspect, but
>you'll have no problem with it I'm sure...
 
maybe he will. and as of now, obama is the record holder.
 
bob
jdeluise <jdeluise@gmail.com>: Jun 07 01:32AM

On Tue, 06 Jun 2017 20:55:55 -0400, bob wrote:
 
> she's out of school in june. he said he was moving to california. he
> lied. he wants to stay around DC for political reasons. very bad form.
 
His daughter is 15 so she's not out of school. He stated for years that
he'd be staying in DC after his term, for at least a couple of years.
He's stated this since something like 2013! Want links?
 
Do try to read something other than Breitbart, please... you might learn
something new.
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jun 06 09:53PM -0400


>His daughter is 15 so she's not out of school. He stated for years that
>he'd be staying in DC after his term, for at least a couple of years.
>He's stated this since something like 2013! Want links?
 
he said just 3 months ago that he was moving to california in june
after the school yr ended.
 
>Do try to read something other than Breitbart, please... you might learn
>something new.
 
sorry, it's bad form. you know it.
 
bob
jdeluise <jdeluise@gmail.com>: Jun 07 01:55AM

On Tue, 06 Jun 2017 21:53:25 -0400, bob wrote:
 
> he said just 3 months ago that he was moving to california in june after
> the school yr ended.
 
Links?
 
 
>>Do try to read something other than Breitbart, please... you might learn
>>something new.
 
> sorry, it's bad form. you know it.
 
No, since he's said he'd be staying for the last 4 years... LOL
jdeluise <jdeluise@gmail.com>: Jun 07 01:57AM

On Wed, 07 Jun 2017 01:55:04 +0000, jdeluise wrote:
 
> Links?
 
Everything I've found in a couple minutes of searching indicate that
indeed he bought a house in California but is planning on staying in
DC... (which is what I've read for some time now). But, I'd like to see
your links. Do you dare provide them?
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jun 06 09:49PM -0400


>> why don't you try refuting his post. otherwise, i'm inclined to believe
>> it's true.
 
>Did iceberg cite anything or provide any links?
 
no. should be easy to prove wrong then?
 
bob
Gracchus <gracchado@gmail.com>: Jun 06 06:56PM -0700

On Tuesday, June 6, 2017 at 6:49:52 PM UTC-7, bob wrote:
> >> it's true.
 
> >Did iceberg cite anything or provide any links?
 
> no. should be easy to prove wrong then?
 
True until proven false? Seems counterintuitive.
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: Jun 06 05:52PM -0700

On Monday, June 5, 2017 at 7:19:06 PM UTC-4, StephenJ wrote:
 
> No thanks, too many ads/videos going through all those pages. Besides,
> I've done enough 'lists' around here, LOL. Mine, this one, TT's 250,
> seems enough to show I top all the lists.
 
You are avoiding the topic. We want to get an idea of how many of the films considered some of the greatest of all time on that list (everything to big budget classics to classic indies and some foreign language films) you've seen. The fact that you're avoiding it makes me think you are a film buff mostly of current and bigger budget films of the last 20 years(that's ok but at least admit it.) And no, the fact that you see 100s of films in the cinema a year doesn't make you more of a film buff than other people who enjoy films in whatever way they choose to watch them.
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jun 06 09:22PM -0400

>they had seen ALL the important classics & watched lots of new films.
>(around half in the list are prior 1990 - and half after it, including
>lots of unimportant modern titles)
 
i know for a fact that jaros sees movies in the theater at a pace like
i've never seen. i'm certain it's easily > 100 movies/yr.
 
>What Stephen said was that he has not seen 5 films from first hundred
>most important films. I have seen 100/100 and my total is around 800 titles.
 
i have no idea how/when you watch movies. but if you say so, i believe
it.
 
bob
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: Jun 06 06:42PM -0700

On Tuesday, June 6, 2017 at 9:22:19 PM UTC-4, bob wrote:
 
 
> i have no idea how/when you watch movies. but if you say so, i believe
> it.
 
> bob
 
Do you believe in the Loch Ness monster too? How about Bigfoot? :)
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jun 06 09:55PM -0400

On Tue, 6 Jun 2017 18:42:56 -0700 (PDT), Court_1
>> it.
 
>> bob
 
>Do you believe in the Loch Ness monster too? How about Bigfoot? :)
 
lol. i have no reason to suspect he'd be lying about movie counts. i
mean, who on earth would lie about it?
 
bob
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jun 06 09:04PM -0400

On Mon, 5 Jun 2017 08:52:19 +0100, Brian W Lawrence
 
>On 04/06/2017 23:05, calimero377@gmx.de wrote:
 
>> About 95 % of NYT, WaPo, AP, CNN, ABC, NBS, CBS, NSNBC journalists vote Democrat.
 
>And we know this how?
 
for real?
 
 
 
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
>> http://www.avg.com
 
bob
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jun 06 09:12PM -0400

On Mon, 5 Jun 2017 09:33:20 +0100, Brian W Lawrence
>between most countries of the world which is nonbinding and has no legal
>requirements attached to it. Individual nations are free to decide for
>themselves how much or how little action they are willing or able to take.
 
yes, i mentioned this yesterday: obama might've gotten away with it
because it was non binding. that was the kicker. and if it's
nonbinding, wtf good was it??
 
>original post? I didn't need CNN or any other media source to tell me
>that he was presenting 'facts' with little basis in truth. He's got
>form.
 
to break it down 1 step further: you don't do your own research on
global warming, i'm assuming. i'm assuming you read an article written
by a journalist, and that journalist presents data based on his own
viewpoint. so you have to ask yourself, if a person has an agenda, can
i believe the point he's making - or just the small bit of chosen data
that may be "fact"?
 
this isn't for global warming only, it's for ANYTHING. any journalist
can write any article with a slant toward his preferences. just like
any movie producer can make you take any side he wants.
 
CNN (i.e. MSM) may present some facts, some lies, and some half truths
- but it's all done with an agenda. and that agenda isn't "the whole
truth and nothing but the truth."
 
bob
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jun 06 09:18PM -0400

On Mon, 05 Jun 2017 13:55:33 +0300, Pelle Svanslös <pelle@svans.los>
wrote:
 
>agreement.
 
>The Paris deal was built on top of an existing, Senate approved
>agreement (UNFCCC).
 
"on top of?" lol
 
see, the press and certain citizens had no problem with 1 man rule for
the last 8 yrs, but when obama does things like this without specific
senate approval, it opens the door for trump to 1 man rule it his way.
and then the whining starts.
 
>provisions to make binding was a central concern for many countries, in
>particular the United States, which wanted an agreement the president
>could accept without seeking congressional approval.
 
bingo. and therin lies the problem. it's how he ran the last few yrs
of his presidency.
 
>commitments. The agreement, however, includes binding procedural
>commitments – such as the requirements to maintain successive NDCs and
>to report on progress in implementing them.
 
NDCs are a joke btw. what kind of moronic "treaty" would use something
like that?
 
>financial commitments beyond those contained in the UNFCCC, and can be
>implemented on the basis of existing law, President Obama chose to
>approve it by executive action.
 
and the non binding trait of the "treaty" is what allowed him to sign
it - and what allowed trump to immediately "unsign" it.
 
that's the problem with these types of things. don't whine now that
obama's out and trump's in. in 4 yrs maybe it'll be jill stein signing
us back in. but it should be a better treaty and from american
perspective, done the right way with senate approval.
>comes from a treaty that the United States Senate ratified in the 1990s:
>The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), as
>explained by the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions:
 
sorry, this is bunk.
 
>avoiding greenhouse gas emissions. The Paris Agreement defines how
>countries will implement their UNFCCC commitments after 2020.
 
>http://www.snopes.com/2017/06/01/authority-paris-agreement/
 
bob
Guypers <gapp111@gmail.com>: Jun 06 06:26PM -0700

On Tuesday, June 6, 2017 at 9:18:54 PM UTC-4, bob wrote:
> >countries will implement their UNFCCC commitments after 2020.
 
> >http://www.snopes.com/2017/06/01/authority-paris-agreement/
 
> bob
 
Jaysus man, you are one fukking bore!!
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jun 06 09:54PM -0400

On Tue, 6 Jun 2017 18:26:01 -0700 (PDT), Guypers <gapp111@gmail.com>
wrote:
 
 
>> >http://www.snopes.com/2017/06/01/authority-paris-agreement/
 
>> bob
 
>Jaysus man, you are one fukking bore!!
 
why, thank you dumbo!
 
bob
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jun 06 09:52PM -0400

On Mon, 05 Jun 2017 14:16:39 +0300, Pelle Svanslös <pelle@svans.los>
wrote:
 
 
>But with tennis "heroes", you're supposed to wear chastity belts all
>your life if you fall out with the previous hero?!
 
>Ridiculous! How old are you?! 13?
 
thinks she's 43
 
bob
Paul <quiller123@gmail.com>: Jun 06 06:51PM -0700

On 6/6/2017 5:44 PM, Fota wrote:
>>> Nbc
 
>> NBC only has weekends
 
> According to their website, they're doing the semis on Thursday and Friday too. Hope that's not wrong. I've been living on a sparse diet of Tennis Channel.com On Demand highlights so far.
 
YES, THERE WILL BE A "FREE" CHANNEL THAT WILL SHOW SEMIS ON
THURSDAY, SO AT LEAST THEY WILL START COVERAGE THEN.
 
BUT DAMN, THESE CABLE COMPANIES ARE OUT TO MILK EVERY SINGLE CENT
THEY CAN FROM US!
 
GREEDY BASTARDS!
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: Jun 06 06:38PM -0700

Who's the real father?
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jun 06 09:49PM -0400

On Tue, 6 Jun 2017 18:38:15 -0700 (PDT), Court_1
 
>Who's the real father?
 
john travolta.
 
bob
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jun 06 09:04PM -0400

On Mon, 5 Jun 2017 16:47:25 -0700 (PDT), Gracchus
 
>On Monday, June 5, 2017 at 4:37:42 PM UTC-7, Guypers wrote:
 
>> My ass, most of them do, Monfils today in the third set, Fed at 08 FO final, Borg tanked routinely!
 
>I didn't see today's match and don't know it he tanked, but Montfils is a mental flake and idiot who never learned to pace himself in a 3-of-5 set match. That accounts for a lot of his losses.
 
very true. monfils is more interested in dumbell curls than building
up his stamina. hence, his results.
 
> Borg also tired himself out in matches early in his career, but I don't remember that being an issue or him ever tanking in prime years of '77-81. I've no doubt that Federer did tank the FO '08 final. That's an isolated case for him though.
 
bob
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jun 06 09:00PM -0400

On Mon, 5 Jun 2017 19:28:25 +1000, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>
wrote:
 
 
>Monfils & Dimtrov are brothers from different mothers. This is dad;
 
>http://www.officialpsds.com/images/thumbs/ronald-mcdonald-psd51748.png
 
lol
 
bob
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jun 06 09:02PM -0400

>> treated every single match like a Wimbledon final, whether it was a
>> Wimbledon final or 1st rd qualifiers.
 
>Maybe that's the secret to separating yourself from other GOAT contenders.
 
maybe. and i've said this a long time now. fed's consistency is
legenday in my book. i don't know if it means his peak was the highest
peak, but his median was certainly the highest median.
 
> It would take savant-level mental focus and toughness for Fed to do what you describe. Maybe in the end that's more important than best at best.
>I mean, if Djok were able to do it he wouldn't have crashed after last year's FO. If Rafa were able to do it he wouldn't crash out of 25% of slams before the semis...
 
agree.
 
bob
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