Homerun!

Other guy should have been able to return that, I just think he was surprised to see it come back. I agree somewhat with Westy, it certainly lacks the flair of American football when a player makes a spectacular catch, or well executed plays trounce their opponents. Even baseball which is paint drying boring for 90% of the game has homeruns, base-stealing etc to keep things exciting every now and then. Tennis is one of those you have to have played to understand the difficulty and skills of shots the pro's make on a consistent basis. I think that was as great shot by Roddick. I think he failed to completely anticipate where it was going, but managed to compensate for that failure with speed and skill.

Agree and agree, Just a homerun of shamelesss voluntarism and conservative liberalism. "Life is what you make it..." / "You have a choice..."

So the poor, the oppressed, the interned... they all have a choice too? And life is what you make of it? Which path will you choose? (Short of what has already been chosen for you, that is)

>> ^tsquire1:

Apparently the lesson here is that out of 40 films, there are only 6 women and the rest men. Thus, Hollywood represents an industry catering to patriarchy, where the wise are men and only (mostly) men.
Good stuff btw


>> ^kymbos:

Or... Hollywood has three ideas, repeated ad nauseum.
And is it me, or are the Matrix lines the emptiest? "Everything that has a beginning, has an end". Yeah, thanks.

Verhoeven is a real hit and miss director for me. Robocop was an out of the ballpark classic homerun. No doubt there. Total Recall less so, but still a damn awesome film (Quaaaaaid).

Starship Troopers I loved at the time, but increasingly like less as it's very pro military (And I know that people hate the interpretation compared to the book, but I haven't read it).

I can't really recall my reaction to Basic Instinct and have never seen Showgirls

But Robocop... true classic

What amazes me is that people still think that the winners of professional sporting events have anything to do with the skill of the players.

As soon as money is introduced, and it becomes entertainment, you should just expect the spirit of fair play and sportsmanship to go right out the window. The owners associations only care about putting more fans in the stands at the highest possible ticket price. The league controls the officiating, and the money controls the league. Every professional sport has their examples of how money ruins them: the NFL that welcomes felons with open arms, the NBA has referees betting on the outcomes of the games and then making calls to get those outcomes, baseball players juicing up on steroids so they can hit more homeruns, cyclists blood doping to get an edge, sporting leagues tweaking the seeding of playoffs to put particular teams in the finals, etc. ad nauseaum. These will all continue to become more and more prevalent until the fan outrage reaches critical mass and they stop buying tickets or watching matches on the telly. When the money goes away the ethics of the games will return. I'm not gonna hold my breath.

Well, let's see if we can do the math... like a Drake's equation of baseball:

[typical at-bats per-game: 3] x [chance of hitting in any one at-bat: Tuiasasopo's AVG is ca 0.2] x [chance a Tui hit will be a homerun: ca 0.08 (1/12, this is the most arguable stat, he's still green, and before this HR, the chance would've been 0!)] x [chance the count will be 3-1 when you go for it: I dunno, but there are only 7 possible counts and THIS is a hitter's count: if you're gonna go for it this would be a favorable count to do it: ca. 0.2] x [chance it'll go left field: pretty good if you're a right-handed hitter: but to be conservative, 0.5] x [chance it'll go to the second deck: dunno, but it didn't fulfill this particular part of the prophecy, so let's call it a wash: 1] = 0.0048, half a percent.

Blowers had about a 1/200 chance of getting his prediction right! Not bad.
But how many games did she say he's called?

stats from: http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/t/tuiasma01.shtml

Tags for this video have been changed from 'mike, blowers, homerun, mariners' to 'mike blowers, Matt Tuiasosopo, homerun, seattle, mariners, toronto, blue jays' - edited by SlipperyPete

Or you just have to remember that you don't have to swing like the major leaguers to hit a homerun...

FINESSE PEOPLE! FINESSE!!!

I'm just trying to be helpful. early on when I became a member here someone got on me for asserting things without attribution. so I figure it's easier to source the infromation as i go along instead of having to go back and do it.

I don't expect you to agree with everything I've stated. hopefully you'll acknowledge that religion is very subjective and that is why there is so much disagreement, not just between different religions but between different sects within the same religion.

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
Jee whiz with the links and references on all your comments.

In reply to this comment by qruel:
Now we are getting somewhere !
That explains why you thought Romney's speech on faith was a homerun, despite the inaccuracies I brought up.

Can you understand why "some" christians do not think mormons are christians ?
they think the mormon doctrine (and history) do not align with the doctrine and history of christianity and that it is an insult and sham to them. this link provides many of those differences which many might not know about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Mormonism

and as far as the baptism thing goes

Some critics claim that Baptism for the Dead is not justified by the Bible.[75][76] Apologists believe that 1 Corinthians 15:29 refers to this practice,[77] as well as Malachi 4:5–6; John 5:25; 1 Peter 4:6.[78] For additional rebuttal information, see Baptism for the Dead.

___________________

this all goes to show that religion in general is a very subjective thing. which is why

Today, there are many schism organizations who regard themselves as a part of the Latter Day Saint movement, though in most cases they do not acknowledge the other branches as valid and regard their own tradition as the only correct and authorized version of Smith's church. Most of these organizations are small. The vast majority of Latter Day Saints belong to the largest denomination, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints which reports 13 million members worldwide. The second-largest denomination is the more ecumenical Community of Christ, which reports over 250,000 members. The third largest is The Church of Jesus Christ, with fewer than 20,000 adherents.(that was from wiki)

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
..and of course I knew that Mormons perform baptisms for the dead. I am mormon. Baptisms for the dead are written about in the KJV of the HOLY BIBLE.

Mormons follow the Holy Bible very strictly. We don't believe that Joseph Smith founded a new religion. It's the same Church that Jesus Christ established during his mortal life in Israel, restored by Joseph Smith.

Now we are getting somewhere !
That explains why you thought Romney's speech on faith was a homerun, despite the inaccuracies I brought up.

Can you understand why "some" christians do not think mormons are christians ?
they think the mormon doctrine (and history) do not align with the doctrine and history of christianity and that it is an insult and sham to them. this link provides many of those differences which many might not know about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Mormonism

and as far as the baptism thing goes

Some critics claim that Baptism for the Dead is not justified by the Bible.[75][76] Apologists believe that 1 Corinthians 15:29 refers to this practice,[77] as well as Malachi 4:5–6; John 5:25; 1 Peter 4:6.[78] For additional rebuttal information, see Baptism for the Dead.

___________________

this all goes to show that religion in general is a very subjective thing. which is why

Today, there are many schism organizations who regard themselves as a part of the Latter Day Saint movement, though in most cases they do not acknowledge the other branches as valid and regard their own tradition as the only correct and authorized version of Smith's church. Most of these organizations are small. The vast majority of Latter Day Saints belong to the largest denomination, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints which reports 13 million members worldwide. The second-largest denomination is the more ecumenical Community of Christ, which reports over 250,000 members. The third largest is The Church of Jesus Christ, with fewer than 20,000 adherents.(that was from wiki)

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
..and of course I knew that Mormons perform baptisms for the dead. I am mormon. Baptisms for the dead are written about in the KJV of the HOLY BIBLE.

Mormons follow the Holy Bible very strictly. We don't believe that Joseph Smith founded a new religion. It's the same Church that Jesus Christ established during his mortal life in Israel, restored by Joseph Smith.

I disagree with the man on several points however I must say that it takes a certain of person to be able to go forth and make his case to the American people and actually answer questions posed to him, with the visit to Columbia, the interview on TV and his speech in the UN.

I thought the introduction by Lee Bollinger, the university president of Columbia was appalling, calling him a "petty and cruel dictator" when the University itself invited Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to speak. To which he replied:

"In Iran, tradition requires when you invite a person to be a speaker, we actually respect our students enough to allow them to make their own judgment, and don’t think it’s necessary before the speech is even given to come in with a series of complaints to provide vaccination to the students and faculty."

While we sit and laugh at his lunacy regarding gay people, I am glad we are allowed to make our own judgments rather then sitting here and reading the constant war drumming about a military strike against Iran which sounds so much like the fear mongering and lies fed to us in the run up to Iraq.

The most important thing is that he reiterated that Iran is pursuing peaceful nuclear power acquisition, a point that is supported by the IAEA. Yet in the West we have constant allusion that they are researching nuclear weapons or attacking US forces covertly. The US has branded the Iran Republican guard as a terrorist organization, the fleet is in the Persian gulf. It's like the US Administration is just itching for an excuse to expand the war into Iran.

I mean don't take my word for it. Heres the American Thinker:

"Now for the good news. All the damaging consequences of all the blunders the President has committed to date in Iraq are reversible in 48- to 72-hours - the time it will take to destroy Iran's fragile nuclear supply chain from the air. And since the job gets done using mostly stand-off weapons and stealth bombers, not one American soldier, sailor or airman need suffer as much as a bruised foot.

Let's look downstream the day after and observe how the world has changed.

First and foremost, there's this prospective fait accompli -- and it changes everything. The Iranians are no longer a nuclear threat, and won't be again for at least another decade, and even that assumes the strategic and diplomatic situation reverts to the status quo ante and they'll just be able to pick up and rebuild as they would after an earthquake. Not possible.

Next, the Iranians would do nothing -- bupkes. They don't attack Israel, they don't choke off the world's oil supply, they do not send hit squads to the United States, there is no "war" in the conventional sense of attack counterattack. Iran already has its hands full without inviting more trouble. Its leaders would be reeling from the initial US attack and they would know our forces are in position to strike again if Iran provokes us or our allies. They would stand before mankind with their pants around their ankles, dazed, bleeding, crying, reduced to bloviating from mosques in Teheran and pounding their fists on desks at the UN. The lifelines they throw to the Iraqi insurgents, Hezbollah and Syria would begin to dry up, as would the lifelines the double-dealing Europeans have been throwing to Iran. Maybe the Mullahs would lose control.

Miracles would be seen here at home. Democratic politicians are dumbstruck, silent for a week. With one swing of his mighty bat, the President has hit a dramatic walk-off homerun. He goes from goat to national hero overnight. The elections in November are a formality. Republicans keep the White House and recapture both houses of Congress. Hillary is elected president - of the Chappaqua PTA.

[...]

Am I dreaming? I don't think so. Being too sensible is probably more like it. In any event, I am not creating anything original here. Combine Bush's recent statements with those of the President of France and it's not hard to see where this is heading. Mr. Bush still has time to put America back on the offensive again. But with only a little more than a year left in his term he has no time to lose. Rarely does history provide a failed wartime leader with such a golden opportunity for salvation.

Carpe diem, Mr. President. The chicken pita is on me."

I mean WTF?

no there isnt spoon. I remember when mark mcgwire was on his homerun rampage and a pitcher actually threw a pitch that was arched like that one was. Although in slow pitch softball, there is a rule stating that a pitch has to be arched to a certain extent otherwise it's called a ball. On another note, this seems to be a celebrity match of some sort so I'm sure they probably called everything a strike.

I don't understand this game either but upvote since that's an amazing *insert correct term*(hit, shot, homerun?)