Posts by Chloe Smith11

The matchup between LeBron James and Dirk Nowitzki looks like it’s sitting at roughly 1.65 to 2.10
What on earth?

I have a feeling the Dallas Mavericks might actually give the Los Angeles Lakers a run for their money tonight, especially since the Lakers still look pretty shaky whenever they're playing on the road. Personally, I think Dirk Nowitzki and the rest of the Dallas crew can probably cover a 4.5-point spread. If San Antonio was able to pull it off, I suppose it’s not out of the question for Los Angeles too...
I’m also still leaning toward the idea that the New York Knicks will cover that 4.5-point spread against the Philadelphia 76ers. Ever since Mike D'Antoni left, they’ve honestly felt like a completely different squad. About ten days ago, Philly took them by 12 at Madison Square Garden, but the vibe around the Knicks was just totally different back then. Since bringing in the new coach, they've managed to win all four games, doing so by an average margin of about 22.5 points. I suspect they’ll keep this momentum going, and even if the 76ers end up winning, I imagine it’ll be a pretty close contest.

After a string of relatively rough days, everything seems to be falling apart at once today: Philly, Danny Granger, Monta Ellis, and even Miami is playing without their key guy.
Starting tomorrow, I suppose I'll just counter every single logical analysis out there, because honestly, what else is there to do? 🤷

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/76...is-source-says

Kevin Martin under 16.5 points @unknown

I suppose there are a few reasons why this looks like a solid play to me:

- Statistically speaking, Martin seems to be much more effective playing at home, where he averages about 22.2 points, whereas his production drops off significantly on the road to just 12.4 points.
- He’s been struggling lately, which I suspect is due to a lingering shoulder injury. Over his last four away games, his scoring has dwindled to 11, 7, 5, and 3 points respectively; in fact, it’s been about a month since he managed to clear this particular threshold in an away setting.
- Given that the aforementioned injury apparently flared up during the last game, his availability tonight is somewhat uncertain. Even though he claims he feels fine and is ready to go—suggesting that if he doesn't play, you'd at least get your money back—there's still plenty of doubt. Houston Rockets guard Kevin Martin (shoulder) is considered a game-time decision for Tuesday's game at Oklahoma City after being a limited participant in practice Monday, according to the Houston Chronicle. Martin said he has dealt with the shoulder issue for the past month but hit a hard screen during Sunday's contest against Cleveland
- Looking at the season matchups, the Rockets have faced the Oklahoma City Thunder three times already. In their lone trip to face them, Martin only put up 13 points, compared to his more productive home games where he scored 16 and 32.

Good luck to everyone.

I suppose I should thank Oklahoma City Thunder for giving me my sixth parlay of the day that ended with just one single miss. 🤮🤮🤮

Man, I feel like I've been wandering through the Himalayas or something... 🙂

Orlando Magic
Amar'e Stoudemire under
Spurs by 2
Miami Heat -15, 2

Odds at 5.96🙂

I suppose I’ve always been more of a sucker for a solid melody, regardless of whether it's some catchy pop tune, an electronic track, or even heavy death metal. I guess you could say my taste is pretty much all over the place. On the other hand, lyrics don't tend to carry much weight for me; back in high school, I don't think I ever really cared about what a poet or a songwriter was actually trying to convey.
Pinpointing just one specific thing is quite difficult, though maybe I’d have to go with Coldplay - Yellow. That melody is absolutely infectious; from about 2002 to 2004, I think it was playing on a loop in my head almost every single day.

Charlton Heston, mostly because I’ve always had a soft spot for that old-school theatrical style of acting—you know, where the facial expressions and body language actually mean something.

@ Alex
It seems we just have fundamentally different philosophies when it comes to life and death, though I suppose there’s a distinction between contemplating these things in a quiet room and being thrust into a crisis where you don't exactly have much time for deep reflection. In this specific instance, there wasn't any mention of a weapon being involved, and I find the priest's claim that she "chose death" to be somewhat nonsensical. In my view, she chose to take a risk and fight back, because there's certainly no guarantee that a man would show mercy just because she surrendered to his advances. I'll admit, perhaps the priest could have phrased things a bit more thoughtfully, but if her intention was simply to offer some small measure of comfort to those who cared for her, then I guess it's acceptable enough.

Donna Campbell6 said:That priest's statement is just plain bullshit... because it implies the girl somehow "chose" death. I mean... the poor thing was murdered in cold blood, and that's the only truth here.
Everything else is just a product of that half-crazy American obsession with turning every single tragedy and horror into some grand epic poem.🙄
It also feels like they're trying to force a comparison to those firefighters who are constantly being labeled "heroes" or "martyrs" in endless press releases for whatever reason. Is that just a way to soothe the collective conscience or what? Should we be calling everyone who dies in car accidents "heroes" too? And how exactly is that supposed to help anyone...

1. Writing epics isn't something exclusive to the North America.
2. Depicting a woman resisting assault as a heroine isn't necessarily meant to highlight the fact that she was murdered; rather, I guess the intention might be to encourage or empower women facing abuse in general—to show them they can fight back.
3. If we feel our firefighters shouldn't have been labeled heroes, then by that same logic, we shouldn't have honored those who perished on 9/11 either. Both groups died in the line of duty for the greater good—though perhaps our local crews were just trying to put out brush fires, we shouldn't forget they were also responding to house fires—and the sheer scale of those events only amplified the intensity of the commentary that followed.
4. Sometimes people who pass away tragically are called heroes because of their actions, though I suspect it's mostly just a way to offer some small measure of comfort to their loved ones. It's a shame that some people, who don't quite grasp the full context, continue to debate why certain individuals are deemed heroes while others aren't. In the end, the priest's attempt to provide solace to the father seemed perfectly appropriate, and I suppose that’s what matters most.

So, the priest put it this way:
"She proved she was willing to face death rather than betray her youthful ideals; she chose to lose her physical life instead of trampling upon her human dignity and her unfulfilled dreams."
I suppose the wording was a bit clumsy, though I suspect its primary purpose was to offer comfort to the family and send a message to other women to hold their ground. It feels a little awkward because it’s hard to imagine a young girl preoccupied with such heavy ideological reflections at a time like that—truthfully, it's impossible to know what crosses a person's mind in those moments, as it likely varies from one individual to the next.
As for how we interpret that statement and this ongoing debate—women who have been victims of sexual assault certainly suffer humiliation and have their dignity violated, but their honor remains intact; it seems that is something John Doe still fails to grasp.

I wish you nothing but the best regarding the Pink Panther and Peter Sellers. Honestly, I think that one scene where she leaps off the gymnastics apparatus, tumbles all the way down the stairs, and just calmly says, "That felt good!" might just be the funniest moment in cinematic history.

William Williams27 said:Quincy:

the chosen people say: hope acts just like a religion; it’s basically opium for the masses. it helps you get through the day. but at the same time, it keeps you from actually doing anything right now. so you just end up spinning your wheels.

Maybe "paralyzing" is a bit intense, but I definitely feel like we miss out on the present when we're always waiting for some future version of life.

I tend to lump desires, expectations, and hope all together. If we want something, doesn't that mean we aren't happy with what we've got? And then we start expecting things to happen. (To me, expectation feels closer to reality than hope does—it's more like you feel you've earned something specific).

You could argue that hope, faith, and expectation are totally different things.
But honestly, doesn't hope inherently include expectation?

While hope and expectation are certainly linked, I suspect they can't be treated as exact synonyms, mostly because of how much the probability of an outcome plays into the distinction. Here are a few ways I see it working:
-You might say, "I hope I win the Powerball jackpot," but given how slim those odds actually are, you probably wouldn't go around saying, "I expect to win the Powerball," right?
-Then there is the matter of tone; hope is almost always tied to a positive outcome, whereas expectation isn't. For instance, if someone receives a terminal diagnosis and their doctor tells them they only have a few months left, they would logically expect death, yet they might still cling to the hope that some kind of medical miracle occurs and they recover.

William Williams27 said:Wait, so hope isn't an expectation?

So what exactly is hope then?

I believe I’ve actually addressed all of those points in the subsequent sections of my previous post. It might be worth revisiting that entire thread to get the full picture.

William Williams27 said:We usually group hope with the good stuff, unlike anger or sadness... but doesn't hope actually trigger those negative feelings in the first place?
Isn't hope just what keeps us constantly looking toward the future instead of staying put?
Sure, there are those rough patches where hope feels like your only lifeline, but maybe that's a trap. Shouldn't we be focusing on living in the moment?
I honestly think a single genuine smile right now is worth way more than any amount of hope. We tend to miss all the little blessings because we’re too busy chasing "what if."
So, where does hope even come from? Is it just pure desire?

If we look at those four fundamental truths about suffering, wouldn't it make more sense to just let go of hope entirely?

I wouldn't say that's quite hope; I think those are just high expectations, which are what truly drive those negative emotions. I don't entirely agree with bluebison70 either, who suggests that hope is simply expecting a positive outcome. To my mind, hope is more akin to a sense of faith in a future positive result, and I really wouldn't want to conflate faith with mere expectation. An expectation carries a certain probability of being met, so when it inevitably fails, it naturally leads to some level of disappointment. Hope, on the other hand—if you view it as a form of faith—is something that feels almost indestructible.

I suppose the Department of the Interior ought to be funding the production and promotion of American films, though naturally, not just any random project. It seems to me they should really be focusing their efforts on supporting young, talented directors rather than everything else.

Anthony Reed said:But now we claim we're different from animals, right? Like we aren't built that way. Just turn on the TV—everyone is playing games, all anyone talks about is sex, wars are being fought (fighting, death, blood, pain), people are stealing from whoever they can (where's the guilt in that?)... you name it, it's all there.

We aren't really any different from animals. Honestly, it feels like we either don't have brains, or if we do, they've totally atrophied by now... shout out to the exceptions, though.

Ignorance isn't a blessing. I've gone back and forth on this with my friends a hundred times. They basically tell me I'm acting like a total idiot—you know, someone who doesn't bother to think, a lowlife, a moron, whatever slang you want to use—and that I should just stop worrying and stay blissfully unaware. I'm not having it. I'd much rather spend my whole life asking questions about everything under the sun, even if I never find the answers. I'd rather deal with the worry and use my head than live as someone who knows nothing.😉

Of course, the experience of self-awareness is irreplaceable, and I suppose it’s infinitely more valuable than some purely "animalistic" existence. But when you consider the sheer volume of negativity that gets shoved in our faces daily—stuff we’re forced to live through constantly—it makes me feel like a life lived without all this mental clutter might actually be a blessing. Sometimes, I can't help but think it might just be better to exist as a *tabula rasa*, rather than moving steadily toward the destruction of both our planet and ourselves.

A film only qualifies as a parody if its actual intention is to mock something. If Independence Day was designed to be a parody, then someone please just go ahead and butcher me, slicing me into 427 perfectly identical pieces. I suppose I’d just call it some sort of unserious SF; it isn't exactly bad, but it isn't great either—kind of like a high-volume, low-margin business model where you're working harder than you're making.

I still find myself leaning toward War of the Worlds.
When I first caught a glimpse of the trailer for Independence Day, I honestly had this Independence Day daydream that it would be the greatest SF film ever made. And in some ways, it was—those aerial dogfights were crafted so well they actually gave me chills, and the core concept of an invasion is just pure madness. However, there is such an abundance of typical Hollywood tropes that makes the whole thing a bit difficult to swallow. I mean, just consider how none of the main characters seem to show even a shred of genuine fear; everyone acts as if they have more bravado than sense, always finding the right moment to crack a joke. And then there are those Cuban cigars... it’s such a tired cliché that you can hardly find an action movie nowadays without them.
War of the Worlds feels much more grounded when it comes to how people actually react to terror, though it is a shame there aren't more direct combat sequences, which I suppose is its primary flaw. It does feature some truly excellent moments (like that scene with the burning train passing through), but the ending feels rushed, doesn't it? You barely realize the machines are falling before the credits start rolling.