Such an easy book to read, and perhaps one of the most interesting sociological theorist I have come to read about. Colourful analogies, simple yet broad use of language makes it not just easy to read, but enjoyable too.

So many books I have looked at before read like 17th Century literature or are just plain boring, yet Marcuse has triumped in this book. I am not especially a critic, nor am I a superior accademic. I am but a simple student trying to get the grades, but I just want reach out to any students who wish to do any piece of work associated with sociological theory.... Choose Marcuse!!

Two characters that work really well in comicdom is without a doubt Batman and Superman. Supes provides the strength, but it is Batman who makes it up with the brains. Their relationship is not mutual, but complimentary of one another. This, however, is not true for Daredevil and Spider-Man. Both characters are set in the same city, NY. Both hold real jobs when out of costume. And both are like what anyone of us, who has a best friend can relate to. They're real and they work very very well together. From the little gestures to the all time witty repartee between the two. They are so different from Batman and Superman, that the only thing they have in common with the others is the fact that each one knows the other's secret.

So what went wrong here? Paul Jenkins weaves a very poorly constructed story that involves the two best team-ups in all comicdom. This is not expected at all from a master such as Jenkins. One, who actually writes, Spidey each month and has written such unforgettable works as the critically acclaimed Inhumans and Origins. Perhaps one of the reasons why he falls short is the fact that he uses the mystic and the magic to bring these characters together to share a common threat. That may work fine with someone like Dr. Strange, just not DD and Spidey. A more street-wise threat would have been a much better choice to go forth into.

The art doesn't help either. Though it maybe right for bringing out the theme,plot and direction of the story, it just doesn't suit the characters. Spidey and DD should be drawn as humanly as possible, but with a touch of acrobatics. Phil Winslade makes you believe that Spidey is a rubber band. While that may work for a guy with spider powers, it's incredulous when it comes a simple acrobat such as DD.

I had such high expectations with this title and never thought twice when I saw that it was under the Marvel Knights imprint. I guess I just expected too much. Hope that the next team-up between the two does them justice and holds true to the witticism to seeing two good friends hopping around in costume. The three stars only come because you can never feel all that bad when you see DD (1 star) and Spidey (1 star) doing their thing, no matter how bad the story and art (1 star) are.

If you are looking for a "feel good" lighthearted read this is not it.

Many of the stories are strange, depressing, and disturbing. One questions if in some cases is it truly love or obsession and lack of common sense that is found at "second sight"

Jewett attempts to present a coherent theology of mankind as male and female. He makes some advances in his cause and presents some cogent and uncomfortably accurate points. However, the logic of his case occasionally falls short of making the case for a new Christian anthropology. Nevertheless, this book represents a positive step towards a reconceptualization of Christian anthropology. Although this new vision will probably not stand up under scrutiny, there are valid points that should not be ignored because of the flaws in the argument.

Fans of John McCain who want to know about the senator's life history will not be too disappointed. It's all there, from his childhood through his military service through his ascendancy to the national spotlight.
Unfortunately, the book is sloppily written and edited. Alexander repeats himself quite often, and he relies too much on long-winded quotes from other sources. Further, the editing leaves a lot to be desired. Phrases like "centered around," as opposed to the correct "centered on" are commonplace and distracting. Alexander's magazine pieces are much better, which leads me to believe this work suffers from poor editing more than the pedestrian prose.

I am a fan of the outdoors and nature literature. I bought this audio book hoping it would make for interesting listening during my commute.This tape comprises some very cheesy stories that mostly revolve around stupid men shooting things (with lame sound-effects to boot). One particularly assinine adventure involves a man who is a "photographer" awed by a majestic moose. He brilliantly decides me MUST have a close up photo of the animal, no matter the cost (including the cost of the mooses' life!)The jackass sneaks up on the moose, and the moose charges at him, and then he shoots it to death.
"Ah, yes.. that was quite and adventure, and I got the most spectacular picture as the moose charged. Thankfully, I had a second to grab my rifle." the narrator reads in wise, gravely sounding voice, oblivious to the fact that he just DESTROYED the animal that captivated him. But it'll live on forever in a photo! Ya right.
Avoid this tape if you value intelligent nature stories. If corny sounds and hunting are a passion, then go for it.

About every eight years, Paul Ehrlich issues a prediction of disaster. And about a decade later, we learn he was wrong.

In his 1968 book "The Population Bomb", he predicted that the world would be unable to feed itself by the end of the century (yes, that century that ended over a year ago). Billions would die of starvation, and the world population would drop to a fraction of its 1968 value.

In 1976, his book "The End of Affluence" predicted that the world economy would crash "within a decade", resulting in a "North America unable to even feed itself".

In 1984, his book "The Cold and Dark: The World After Nuclear War" stated that, unless a unilateral nuclear disarmament pact was implemented, nuclear war was inevitable. He also failed to forsee the collapse of the Soviet Union, arguing that American nuclear policy would result in an increasing repressive and centralized Soviet economy.

This is just the most recent case. He's probably due for another book right about now, and his fans will forget the past when reading it.