scoobdog

Not sure how you could.

And this is the motherfucker trying to lead a philosophical discussion on the English language.

Maybe by that time you’ll get it right.

And still complaining about tips around the holidays...

The Targets here all have the Rascals, not manual wheelchairs, and I can guarantee that most of the people using them are not handicapped... at least physically. As far as the malls, I’ve never asked, and they aren’t anywhere you can walk up and actually see them.

Greatest Sideshow Bob episode ever.

Fight me, bro....

I imagine a whole lot of old people get wheeled in on those and are then promptly forgotten in front of the slot machines.

I’ve never encountered a public wheelchair anywhere outside of an airport.

Where would you encounter an unused wheelchair?

She's amazing.

Fucking sheep.

Most of the 7-6 ones were able to make it in. Only Cuppa Coffee didn't because he had the lowest PA total.

Make that a, RB, WR, and TE, @sahockeygrl15. You have the reserves to cover for sure.

There you go. I once bullshitted my way through an honors class on Frankenstein.

Bullshitting is an art form, but you’ll be a pro once you’re a junior.

It’s not too late. You’re in the playoffs, and you could win this week. You need to swap out a RB and WR, but you’re otherwise doing good.

He may never be the championship coach we need eventually, but he’s a good coach and he’s what we need now. USC fans are just compensating for other issues the university is trying to overcome.

Happy Birthday!

Did Tempty just make the most surprising out in video game history?!

Well.... Clay Helton is back for another year, and 'SC fans are losing their shit. I love it.

I'd like to pick up on your tangent and go wild, if you don't mind.... For a writer, a narrative is paradoxically the bane and the boon of his/her existence. It is a collaboration, or to extend the comparison, is a language made up of other languages (spoken/written and symbolism) that utilizes its own set of rules and portrays a reality that ultimately is out of the direct control of either the writer or the reader. A famous analogy, courtesy of Michelangelo, might be to that of a sculptor who "releases" the subject trapped in a block of marble: as a writer builds the world around his/her characters, the metaphorical stone that holds them in place is removed and they are essentially free of both the safe confines of routine and the inhibitions that prevent them from exploring the darkest areas of their own psyches. Whether it be fiction or documentary, the ultimate goal of the writer is to establish a path for those characters and have faith that they will ultimately end up revealing what the writer intended to convey. The thing about any language is that it isn't as absolute as we often like to think. I've made a pest of myself in the past by using etymology to define words rather than stick to the verbatim definition found in dictionaries, and it stems from something I learned in a English Lit class while working on an assignment for Keats. I don't remember what words I actually had to look up, but one of the purposed of the assignment was to use the OED to look up the etymology of those words instead of using a dictionary, and in the course of a few afternoons sitting at the back of the university's huge references room, I kind of went down a rabbit hole. From that point forward, I came to a realization that the history of language itself is analogous to a narrative: words in their infancy are straightforward devices to convey simple compact concepts and, as time goes on, those words adopt an expanded meaning as they are used in different contexts. Much as with a character in a narrative, when we encounter a word for the first time, we are looking at it in its evolved form, and its only through an exploration of its origins that we can ultimately determine how that word will further evolve through use both by the individual an by the community as a whole. In reference to the OP, I think we can partially explain the generic problems with character acting out of character in similar terms. Another way of looking at this is that the character we first encounter, in his or her "evolved" form, is introduced in context in addition to be being defined for us. Using Nadia as an example, we have to be told that she is an orphan (although it could be fairly easily surmised) but we are also expected to account for the context in which she is introduced. The fact that she first encounter Jean as circus performer adds further information about her physical abilities, her personality, and, most importantly, clues to core psychological issues that will inevitably pop up later. As the story progresses, we learn more about her in conjunction with her interactions with other characters and within the context with which those interactions occur. You can't really have the character of Nadia the personable vagabond without asking yourself, even indirectly, why she chose to become a circus performer before being found by Jean because that sets the path on which her character is "released" from the constraints of the narrative. However... The character that is impetus for this thread is the product of the complicated setup. At the risk of spoiling something that is initial to the story, the character isn't just a sister, but an identical sibling, and that inhibits the context in which she's introduced. For better or worse, the main heroine and the character in question necessarily share a context by nature of who they are. It's easy to see how her personality traits are suppressed early on by the fact that everything we know about her is tied to the same circumstances as the main; even the distinction between their personalities are defined by how they interact with each other. When it comes time to seperate the characters from this symbiotic relationship, the results are going to be unpredictable.

That sucks. After a game day, just about every joint hurts, and Sunday ends up being a lost day.

Only ten pages? You can bullshit your way through that easy.

Hardly. You didn't get the bye, but you're still in a good position.