elegantelliotoffen Posted July 30, 2008 Share Posted July 30, 2008 Good book. http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/billsnfl/story/400228.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted July 30, 2008 Share Posted July 30, 2008 I have a feeling Poz is going to have a great 2008 and great career with the Bills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted July 30, 2008 Author Share Posted July 30, 2008 I have a feeling Poz is going to have a great 2008 and great career with the Bills I think so. Last preseason/ first 3 weeks of the regular season he was all over the field. I like that the guy calling plays in the defensive huddle has obviously got some intelligence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 30, 2008 Share Posted July 30, 2008 I think so. Last preseason/ first 3 weeks of the regular season he was all over the field. I like that the guy calling plays in the defensive huddle has obviously got some intelligence. He's got some intelligence because he reads a mass marketed third-rate history book? You have a very liberal definition of "intelligence". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted July 30, 2008 Author Share Posted July 30, 2008 He's got some intelligence because he reads a mass marketed third-rate history book? You have a very liberal definition of "intelligence". That's a liberal book? What was your problem with it? I though it was pretty interesting except for all the agricultural/horizontal & vertical axis stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 30, 2008 Share Posted July 30, 2008 That's a liberal book? What was your problem with it? I though it was pretty interesting except for all the agricultural/horizontal & vertical axis stuff. How on Earth did you get any of that from my post? "Liberal" means more than "left-wing", and I didn't apply it to the book to begin with. You have serious mental deficiences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted July 30, 2008 Author Share Posted July 30, 2008 How on Earth did you get any of that from my post? "Liberal" means more than "left-wing", and I didn't apply it to the book to begin with. You have serious mental deficiences. Ok fine, but what problems did you have with the book? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 30, 2008 Share Posted July 30, 2008 Ok fine, but what problems did you have with the book? I don't have a problem with the book, I have a problem with third-rate mass marketed history being called "intelligent". It only is in comparison to your normal fare of coloring books and primary readers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted July 30, 2008 Author Share Posted July 30, 2008 I don't have a problem with the book, I have a problem with third-rate mass marketed history being called "intelligent". It only is in comparison to your normal fare of coloring books and primary readers. Have you read it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted July 30, 2008 Share Posted July 30, 2008 I don't have a problem with the book, I have a problem with third-rate mass marketed history being called "intelligent". It only is in comparison to your normal fare of coloring books and primary readers. My read on it was that some guy had a theory ("Guns Germs and Steel lead societies to dominance and others to failure.") Then he looked up historical evidence to support his theory, leaving out a whole mess of other reasons for why societies may have been dominant. I saw it as academic pablum (redundant I know). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 30, 2008 Share Posted July 30, 2008 Have you read it? Coloring books and primary readers? Not for about 40 years. Yes, I've read it. And like I keep saying: it's third-rate mass marketed history. There's no glaring mistakes...but there's ain't a whole lot of depth to it either. Reading it doesn't make you an intellectual...it makes you more of a lemming, actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted July 30, 2008 Author Share Posted July 30, 2008 Coloring books and primary readers? Not for about 40 years. Yes, I've read it. And like I keep saying: it's third-rate mass marketed history. There's no glaring mistakes...but there's ain't a whole lot of depth to it either. Reading it doesn't make you an intellectual...it makes you more of a lemming, actually. Ok, now that's the third time you've used that buzz phrase "third-rate mass marketed history". Can you explain to me (without using google or amazon.com customer reviews) what about the book makes it "third-rate mass marketed history"? "but there's ain't"??????????????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted July 30, 2008 Share Posted July 30, 2008 Coloring books and primary readers? Not for about 40 years. Yes, I've read it. And like I keep saying: it's third-rate mass marketed history. There's no glaring mistakes...but there's ain't a whole lot of depth to it either. Reading it doesn't make you an intellectual...it makes you more of a lemming, actually. Its funny watching you make him run around in circles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 30, 2008 Share Posted July 30, 2008 Ok, now that's the third time you've used that buzz phrase "third-rate mass marketed history". Can you explain to me (without using google or amazon.com customer reviews) what about the book makes it "third-rate mass marketed history"? "Prove it's third-rate mass marketed history...but don't quote Amazon or Google." You don't even see the irony, do you? "but there's ain't"??????????????? Yes. It's a colloquialism. That means "form of speech or phrase not used in formal conversation." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted July 30, 2008 Author Share Posted July 30, 2008 "Prove it's third-rate mass marketed history...but don't quote Amazon or Google." You don't even see the irony, do you? Yes. It's a colloquialism. That means "form of speech or phrase not used in formal conversation." I knew you never read it. You probably don't even have an opinion on it. You're just busting my balls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted July 30, 2008 Share Posted July 30, 2008 Have you read it? I haven't read it. But I am pretty good at finding Waldo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted July 30, 2008 Author Share Posted July 30, 2008 I haven't read it. But I am pretty good at finding Waldo Waldo Geraldo Faldo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 30, 2008 Share Posted July 30, 2008 I knew you never read it. You probably don't even have an opinion on it. "Yes, I've read it. And like I keep saying: it's third-rate mass marketed history." You're just busting my balls. I will when they drop, kid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted July 30, 2008 Author Share Posted July 30, 2008 "Yes, I've read it. And like I keep saying: it's third-rate mass marketed history." I will when they drop. Meanwhile you can't even articulate what you mean by your ingenius catch phrase "third rate mass marketed history". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted July 30, 2008 Share Posted July 30, 2008 Meanwhile you can't even articulate what you mean by your ingenius catch phrase "third rate mass marketed history". I'm not sure how one would make that phrase any more understandable; even to a retard like you molton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts