Jenksismyhero

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 6, 2017 -> 02:22 PM) He's got them right where he wants them!

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Sep 6, 2017 -> 01:59 PM) Its going to be a 1) improperly followed administrative procedure act, 2) due process and 3) equal protection argument. http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-...0905-story.html https://www.reuters.com/article/us-otc-daca...n-idUSKCN1BG32Y I think you will see judge's reach conclusions that arent necessarily the best "legally" so that they can make sure innocent people arent harmed. Bad facts make for bad case law. (Edit) And Id bet that it gets stayed by at least 1 court, because if it ultimately was found unconstitutional it would be almost impossible to "right the wrong." I suppose I buy the Administrative Procedures Act argument, if that's really a thing. The constitutional arguments are bogus IMO. I think it would be pretty dangerous precedent to allow lawsuits against the government brought by citizens relying on promises that go unfulfilled.

QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 6, 2017 -> 12:00 PM) I don't see what their case would be, and if it would be strong enough to even get a stay on the program. Agreed. DACA's an executive order, not law. And isn't DACA basically an order saying that the executive won't enforce immigration law in certain circumstances? So what's the argument? That not enforcing the law is unconstitutional?

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Sep 2, 2017 -> 11:17 AM) Dudek is back!!! Ugh, so is the Illinois defense

I mean, didn't Rick Perry pray for rain a few years ago? Apparently God's to-do list is longer than we thought...

I've been swamped at work the last few days, but even after further discussion, reading and reflection, this season was a bummer. There were moments here or there that were awesome, the ending is where we basically wanted to be, but how we got there and what they had to do to change the characters to fit those end points was pretty much unforgivable. 1) Tyrion. I'm fine with him "losing" to Cersei/Jaime when it comes to battle strategy. That makes sense, he's not a soldier. So whatever, first misstep of taking Casterly Rock and letting Highgarden left unguarded is a reasonable mistake. But all this nonsense about bringing a wight to Cersei, and then TRUSTING that Cersei would abide be her word, is against everything we've ever been told about Tyrion. He's an amazing statesman, a great judge of people/character, and a man who knows his history. NOTHING about his knowledge of Cersei would have let him believe that she would honor that deal. Pretty much exactly what I said 3 weeks ago about this stupid plan - that she would just leave Jon and Dany to fight the Night King while she sits back and watches her enemies die and/or become weaker - came true. It's inconceivable that Tyrion wouldn't see through that or at the very least know that there is a STRONG likelihood that she won't honor the deal. The pregnancy revelation, to me, doesn't change that equation. Now, to be fair, we don't quite know the end game here. Is Tyrion pulling a double cross somehow? Is he not trusting Cersei but playing along with her false promise for another reason? I guess we'll see. 2) Arya/Sansa - I mean, that's the worst part of the season. The fact that the writers believed that the audience would buy that there would be a rift between these two is downright offensive. They essentially asked us to believe that Arya and Sansa (and the audience) would disregard the prior 6 seasons and the experience they went through to get where they are now. We're supposed to throw all that out the window and believe that they're little kids again, bickering about kid s***. And unfortunately this wasn't a huge ruse to trick Littlefinger into believing that his comments to Sansa may actually work. No, Arya and Sansa really did have a rift. Sansa really did consider killing Arya. According to the actor that played Bran, there was a deleted scene involving Sansa finally realizing she could talk to Bran and see what was true/what was not, and that was what prevented her from going after Arya. 3) Littlefinger - obviously the death was what everyone wanted, but it was a season or two late, it had little emotional impact and it again reversed everything we learned about a character from the prior 6 seasons and even the advice Littlefinger was giving Sansa just last week - always keep your options open and make sure you know your enemy's plays before they do. And yet we're supposed to believe that he honestly though he could divide the Stark house after Bran and Arya returned? After his altercation with Jon? Please. His death should have been immediately after the battle of the bastards. Sansa should have called up what's his face from the Vale, explained what happened with his mom and had LF killed off RIGHT after he saved Sansa/Jon. At least then it would have been believable that LF didn't give himself an out. In the scenario that played out this season, LF should have left Winterfell for the protection of the Vale on at least two or three different occasions but he didn't because, what, love? Meh. Now I could be misremembering this a little from the book, but I'm pretty sure they depicted the stuff between Sansa and the boy in the Vale in the show, i.e., that he loved her. So the knights of the Vale would have been loyal to Sansa, especially since LF was threatening the lords of the Vale. 4) Jaime - nothing they did was really terrible with him this season, but I think his decision to finally leave Cersei due to her lack of honor is a bit weak. He didn't leave her after she destroyed the sept, he didn't leave her after she pressed on with this unwinnable war vs dragons, but now that she didn't honor her pledge to fight the dead with Dany and Jon, that's the final straw? I mean, I buy it, but it's not the best way to get Jamie to the "good guys" side. And I feel like the show has flip flopped on Jaime being a good guy/bad guy so much anyway, who knows what we're supposed to think.

Initial reaction: C-

Embarrassing that the supposed best boxer of all time took 9 rounds to beat an amateur. I can't believe people pay to watch him fight.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Aug 22, 2017 -> 04:10 PM) I thought this was an interesting read / theory. The points around Arya made a lot of sense. I'll make the bold claim that Littlefinger will die in the next episode. http://www.esquire.com/entertainment/tv/ne...eason-7-theory/ Why have a private conversation to trick Littlefinger? Seems unnecessary. If that convo was in the open, then I could buy it.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Aug 22, 2017 -> 04:01 PM) If Sansa really does try to kill Arya now, it would be the stupidest writing ever. +1000

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Aug 22, 2017 -> 03:56 PM) I actually don't think it's all that complex, it's just the show writers keeping Baelish in the mix of things (and adding some drama to Winterfell). Baelish stirs things up, he's doing that. Sansa and Arya always hated each other so it's an easy pair to rile up. Arya clearly thinks she is better/smarter than Baelish and he's exposing that. Sansa is probably the most disappointing, she was supposed to have matured and see through the BS better, but she is falling for pettiness and Baelish's whispers. Sending Brienne away is a clear Baelish move IMO, she would have protected both and probably would have caught onto Baelish's schemes. I do think it's leading to one of Sansa or Arya doing something stupid to hurt one another (possibly killing one) before realizing (which is stupid, since they both know his game and should be above it at this point), but probably more realistic is they have a fight and Arya realizes she can't stay at Winterfell and goes south to continue her assassinations. Of all the stuff I hate/find unbelievable about this season, this is right up there as the worst. Both of these girls/women went through hell and back to get back home. They've lost their parents and some siblings, they've endured rape, torture, beatings and almost being killed. Their prior dislike of each other - when they were mere children - would not have continued to the present time. It was all typical kid/sibling stuff. I find it completely implausible that they would both still hold a grudge against one another despite everything they've gone through to survive. This is especially true with regard to that note that Arya found. She honestly believes that Sansa wrote that willingly? That after her father was murdered by the Lannisters she was all hunky-dory because she was in line to be queen? GMAFB. That whole story line is as dumb as the armistice one.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Aug 22, 2017 -> 02:06 PM) That is what Sansa said, I think it was something like shes not going to King's Landing to be a Lannister prisoner. A lot of it was kind of jumbled because prior it seemed like Sansa was going to use Brienne as protection against Arya. (edit) Also Im pretty sure the 3 eyed raven story is how Jon finds out he is a Targaryen. Because Bran said something like "I need to talk to Jon." Maybe to Bran that is really the only relevant issue, everything else is just noise. Which is so dumb because didn't Bran already send a raven to Jon? He could have told Jon in that first communication.

QUOTE (bmags @ Aug 22, 2017 -> 01:57 PM) Right, but when I watched I was like "why send anyone?". They were at open war with Cersei, why would she take that invite without any word from John? And she could have easily sent someone else on her behalf. I have to believe that Jon has communicated his plan to go north of the wall and get the wight to her at some point. Even if he didn't, that explanation would have been provided in the invite to the summit with Cersei since that's the whole point - come see proof of the army that we all must defeat. She'd be pretty negligent in her duties as Queen of the North if she doesn't at least attend a meeting to discuss a possible coalition to defeat an army that is so close to her territory. And she needs to send someone she can trust. I don't buy that she can't trust Littlefinger (with her life anyway). He's had several opportunities to kill her if he wanted to and hasn't. He had no obligation to bring the knights of the Vale to save her and Jon and win back Winterfell. And I think she's still surrended by northern bannerman. Littlefinger would be foolish to kill her at this point. I dunno, I don't see a problem there.

QUOTE (bmags @ Aug 22, 2017 -> 01:28 PM) This was helpful to me because I had zero clue why she sent off Brienne (possible reading is it was to avoid her being used against her sister: https://www.theringer.com/game-of-thrones/2...-jon-arya-sansa I thought she said she didn't want to go to back to King's Landing (seems fair) so she was sending Brienne as her proxy? Is that not the case?

The books are long and well thought out. The big moments are earned. For the most part, the show stuck to a lot of that character/world building in the beginning. Now they don't have that same road map. They've been given a few big moments from Martin (like the origin of Hodor) and were left to figure it out themselves. So far I think we've discovered that (1) it's difficult to finish off a really good book series on TV, especially in a small amount of time, and (2) the main writers aren't as good as Martin. I'm shocked someone at HBO or even Martin didn't step in and fight the writers on this Ocean's Eleven wight theft idea. It is so unbelievably stupid. They better have an amazing finale to make up for it.

QUOTE (bmags @ Aug 21, 2017 -> 10:15 AM) Well now they at least know to focus on the white walkers. Those suckers didn't just die around him they dusted. I was confused about this part: So Jon kills one of the main guys (too easily, btw) and a bunch of the wights vaporize. Conveniently, one doesn't which allows the group to take it as a prisoner. Jon later theorizes that if you kill one of the main guys, all of the wights that were created by him will die. Ok, so that explains why the one wight didn't vaporize. Later the Night King "creates" the white walker dragon by touching it. Again, there's an act by one of the main guys that "creates" the dead being. But didn't they establish earlier in the series that simply dying north of The Wall was enough to create a wight? The one that attacked Jon at Castle Black, for example? And wasn't this idea further established when Jon tells the group they have to burn Thoros so he doesn't turn? So, what's the answer here? Are wights "created" by the main bad guys or are they created once the animal/person dies north of The Wall?

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Aug 21, 2017 -> 09:56 AM) I'm just enjoying it. The conversations had walking toward the dead were worth the commitment the series has been for me alone. The Brienne conversation and making monster babies? s***, that was perfect. The banter between the Magnificent Seven was perfect.

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Aug 21, 2017 -> 09:21 AM) I still hate the show LOST becasue of the ending. Makes it easier to stay with the TWD and GOT and temper expectation s from when the show was riding high. I like the sped up pace. I can't stand it. I wish they had agreed to another season. So many of the plot lines don't make much sense, chief among them the supposed attraction between Dany and Jon. It's so rushed it's unbelievable. They've said about 5 words to each other.

QUOTE (bmags @ Aug 21, 2017 -> 08:23 AM) It's certainly fun and entertaining, but considering how unique and hard to pull off this show has been for so long, it's just a little sad that it feels really rushed to end. There has never in its history been a "we just need to get them here so this happens" moment as obvious as the terrible kidnapping wight plan, but it allowed the dragon thing to happena nd dany and jon to align. But at that point it's just a tv show.It's a good TV show, but just how many other shows could possibly do what GOT has done to this point? I just wanted it to stick the landing a little better. The post-book episodes have become a lot like Lost for me. At first the unknown was awesome and I couldn't wait to see what happened next. I tended to ignore and/or play down some of the details (like fast travel/time jumps) because it served the story. But now we're at the point where the wow factor is still awesome, but it's being seriously undercut by the ridiculousness of the plot devices to get us to the big set pieces. At the end of this I fear I'm going to think the same as Lost - the journey to the end was great, but man was the ending disappointing/underwhelming.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Aug 14, 2017 -> 08:08 AM) My wife is insisting that I still have a truck, so I'll need to trade my access cab Tacoma in for something that'll fit a baby seat. Hoping that the Chevy/GMC Canyon double cabs will work, otherwise it'll be an F150 or a Silverado. Do you haul a lot of stuff? 3rd rows have a good amount of cargo space with all the seats folded down. And renting a truck from Menards or Home Depot is like $20-30.

QUOTE (ReyLo @ Aug 12, 2017 -> 06:35 PM) I honestly am embarrassed to say this but it shocked me that was his statement. I sat there looking at it in disbelief. Like he's such a bulls*** artist that has shown he doesn't think anything is more than a tv show, and yet I thought he would give us something normal here, when there was a death. But no. And I can't believe it and I can't believe I can't believe it. The "both sides" improvised remark was so, so awful.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 12, 2017 -> 05:20 PM) I cannot stand the person I'm taking this quote from but I will still give him the credit as first person I saw it from. Donald Trump's entire plan for defeating ISIS was to call it out publicly. He cannot do so with this group because this is his base. This is the Republican base. Bulls***. Stop with this nonsense. I've seen a lot of Republicans, high profile Republicans, rightly calling this an act of terrorist by Nazis/white nationalists.

Here's what I've been trying to convey, put better by someone else: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/45030...le-negotiations

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 9, 2017 -> 02:42 PM) Oh boy, evil doers makes a comeback. I do endorse assassination as the best of bad choices, but hopefully it could come from someone not American: Texas megachurch pastor Robert Jeffress, one of President Trump’s evangelical advisers who preached the morning of his inauguration, has released a statement saying the president has the moral authority to “take out” North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. “When it comes to how we should deal with evildoers, the Bible, in the book of Romans, is very clear: God has endowed rulers full power to use whatever means necessary — including war — to stop evil,” Jeffress said. “In the case of North Korea, God has given Trump authority to take out Kim Jong Un.” Oh well that solves it.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 9, 2017 -> 02:14 PM) Well, they offered up a deal where they wouldn't and we accepted it and then we broke that deal first before they did, so "they were going to keep trying" remains only one possibility. According to this, they never really honored the deal, and the whole thing was based on Clinton and his admn believing that the NK regime would topple once Kim-Il Sung died. Proving once again we have, at best, an unreliable intelligence community or at worst, a poor one. So keep blaming Bush, Republicans in Congress or whomever, but that wasn't a deal that was going to last anyway. They were dead set on getting a nuclear weapon and we let them. They are currently dead set on building a global delivery system and we're letting them.