{::'KayCeeS::}

I've gotten a lot of flak for suggesting we don't trade up for a QB, but i will probably, legitimately shed tears if Rosen is selected by another team. Sad, I know. Still.

This is what gets me. Should we ban cars? There were 37,641 deaths from car accidents in 2016 alone. Think about that: 2,996 people died in the 9/11 attacks. Where is the outrage about motor vehicles?

We throw the term "hero" around a lot, but really and honestly, James Shaw is one. Think about it: have you ever been in a Waffle House? They're all basically the same. If someone walked into one with an assault rifle, he could basically take out most of the people inside before anyone had a chance to really react. That only four people died is amazing, and that's due to Mr. Shaw.

Well, not exactly a dark horse prediction, but with all this BS about Rosen falling, i predict he's goes in the top five, easy.

"Foucault's Pendulum" by Umberto Eco If you can relate to this novel, if it somewhat or somehow mirrors your own experience, then what may seem its opaqueness becomes lucid: a testament of a kind of inner transition from ego fever-dreaming to silent self-awareness. But even if you do not relate in this manner, it is still a fascinating literary quest-novel in itself, especially for occult history junkies or those who love grand, ambitious works written by genius-level intellects.

You've never invaded Poland! I call bulls**t! And you're right, it is interesting.

Respectfully, what's the point here? I'm honestly curious.

You skipped posts.

I hate quoting a long OP, so I won't. That being said: I've always agreed with you. And by that, I mean, I've never freaked out about these QB's. I love Rosen, but if we can't get good value for a trade up, f*ck him. Because we have six picks in the first three rounds, and we got holes, amirite? No team shat the bed by drafting studs in the early rounds. (I can feel the haters hating on this post, but still, I think it's a rational opinion.)

It did not devolve, thank you very much!! Did you not see the last post before you? And anyway, you're recommending a novel by a guy who wrote a fantasy series about bugs! Yeah, I know him! Adrian Tchaikovsky! Not gonna lie, I've had "Children of Time" on my "to-read" list for a while now... We welcome all here, but if you're gonna be a douche about it.... please don't.

Nelson is gonna fall, dummy. And no QB's will be taken in the first 9 picks. I talked to one NFL GM and he said, and I quote: "THEY'RE ALL BUMS. THEY SHOULD BE PAINTING HOUSES INSTEAD OF THROWING FOOTBALLS". That's an exact quote. I can't reveal my source, obvs. But I thought you guys should know.

Yes... I see that now. My Bad and my apologies.

"The Last Campaign"

Steal their S*it!

Hmmm... i thought about that for a moment, but then i thought: trump tower, nyc, posed photo... etc... I mean, Franklin COULD have time traveled forward and arranged this photo and this post, but the energy it would require to time travel in his day is SUBSTANTIAL, so then my thinking went: well, if they didn't have access to so much energy back in Ben Franklin's day, would this effort be worthy of the energy necessary to send him forward in time? I, after a thorough review, concluded that no, it wasn't the Courier Express interviewing Ben Franklin.

What's your point? Please, use your words. obviously the NY Times, I can tell by the font

My belief: Mediasphere Politics is a circus, meant to distract us from what the bastards are really doing. Fox, CNN, Wall Street Journal, New York Times, all of these outlets are owned and operated by a small amount of corporations, who themselves are owned by a small amount of banks, whose shareholders have bloodlines that are old AF and untouchable. Devil's Advocate: Never mind. C'mon, you got more than that! What is it about Nancy Pelosi that you HATE so much? Use some adjectives! Sorry for the mistake with the last quote. Anyway, you do understand that a straight vote will mean that all presidents will be elected by the cities, right? This is the reason for the Electoral College: so that city folk can't just elect every president at their whim. That's the point. There's almost 400 million people in this country, a lot of them in the cities, but most of them NOT. What you want to do is disenfranchise them, essentially. We are either a nation of 50 STATES, or we're not.

I don't understand. Is it new that the Clintons' are evil f*c*s? Also old news: Trump supported the Clintons! He'd blow your gardener if it gave him a leg up politically! Anything else?

"The Dead Lands" by Benjamin Percy I didn't really like "Red Moon" (Percy's last book), but I suspect if I reread it I might appreciate it more. Percy is kind of infuriating because he is completely resistant to writing a book any way but his own, but that's also his brilliance: he has a real voice that sings from the page, and when you couple this with the fact that he is, whether you like his books or not, a really elite writer, then it's hard to really rag on him for writing love/hate type of books. He pulls no punches and calls it as he sees it. "The Dead Lands" is like a literary love-child of Stephen King, Cormac McCarthy, and Patrick Rothfuss: one part early Dark Tower novels for story gravitas, one part "The Road" for piquant emotional power, and one part "The Kingkiller Chronicles" for fantasy wherewithal. This novel is much more streamlined and focused than "Red Moon": the pages flow by very nicely, super-charged by his super-visual and oratory-like mode of description, which puts you into the scene-stew of the world in a way that very few writers can accomplish. Recommended for fans of post-apocalyptic literature, unless you like your nuclear and viral holocaust homogenized and whitewashed like a valium-bestseller.

The only self-absorbed person is you, because you feel the need to hate randomly on a person you wouldn't know if they flipped you on the ear as they walked by you on the subway. And there is not more to the life than the Bills. There is only the same amount of life.

RIP

"Under the Skin" by Michel Faber First the obvious: it's nothing like the movie. almost literally nothing. But that's great, because i loved the movie and i loved the book: if one was like the other, I don't think I would have been so keen on either. The movie: more Kubrick/Lynch, the book: straight up Animal Farm Orwell. The book is almost exactly how I imagine great satire to be: less smug humor, and more direct gut-punch. But the beauty of this book is that it's so exquisitely crafted in style and structure and prose: the gut punches aren't gratuitous and obvious; they are expertly woven into the story and development of the situation, characters, and world. Little remarks, words, phrases that seem throw-away in that sentence become things of import later on, and everything proceeds in this fashion until the inevitable but not generically predictable end. So: Brilliance, imo. A classic that people will still be reading many moons from now.

This. Anyone who says different is just being jingoistic.

Cool, let us know what you think at the end ! Like I said, I have mixed feelings about Dan Simmons, but when he's on, he's on!

RIP