In this task, you are given books product reviews in English language. The goal is to classify the review as "POS" if the overall sentiment of the review is positive or as "NEG" if the overall sentiment of the review is negative.

Ex Input:
why a classic? . I figured if Oprah wanted America to read this book that it couldn't be too bad. I had held out on reading Faulkner, and now I know why. I read alot and love reading but this book, and "As I Lay Dying" makes me question why oh why Faulkner is a classic. My hypothesis is that its so unapproachable therefore people think it must be brilliant. This is a good book for english class when you can sit around and discuss the meanings of it all and read sparknotes together. This is not a book for sitting at home and reading for yourself. If you want to know the story just go read the sparknotes version. The book itself is too hard to figure out and there is little plot. its just a long headache really.

Ex Output:
NEG


Ex Input:
Both sides of the coin... . Wow.  I read this book a few days ago, and definitely have my own opinion on it.  I thought I would come here and see what other folks are saying, and I'm not altogether surprised.  The first thing that continually surprises me when I read a poorly written book is how so many people can think it is, in fact, well-written, if not even brilliant.  There is, of course, no accounting for taste.      What disturbs me more than the inability of people to recognize both poor writing and equally poor scholarship (which suggests a lack in either education or practice) is how people can urge others to have a balanced view on a subject when they quite obviously could not be more imbalanced in their own views.  I urge those of you that see Bush as a righteous man to please "read around."  There are, obviously, dozens of books about this man and his actions that touch on topics that books like God and George W. Bush will not even acknowlege, much less discuss, defend, or justify.  To ignore these other sources of information is to be possibly tragically misinformed.  While I do not doubt that many of the previous reviews come from good and intelligent people, I am forced to wonder how they can support a man who performs acts, or at least allows them to be performed, that are every bit as vile as that which he claims to oppose.  Read other books and you will see.    One subject that always makes me wince is the labeling of those fighting our soldiers as evil.  I am not supporting them or denouncing our own, but merely urging all of us to recognize the humanity of others.  Labeling a people as evil undermines their humanity and suggests that they do not have good reasons to be fighting, but that they fight simply to overcome those who "love freedom."  This is from  page 114 of this very book, (a quote from Phyllis Wheatley) "In every human breast, God has implanted a principle which we call love of freedom."  Here's a 'revolutionary' thought: Everybody loves and wants freedom.  If people are fighting they are fighting for freedom, we simply must ask one question: Freedom from what?  Read around and see for yourself if you can answer such a question.  Also, see if you can discover, honestly and objectively, the freedoms that we are currently fighting for.    Another huge bother for me in this book is that Kengor refers to Texas as the largest state in the nation.  It's difficult to take the rest of his scholarship seriously when he makes such a statement.    Another horrific, to my mind, thought is that Bush, and lots of his followers, truly believes that God wants him to be president.  A megalomaniacal zealot in charge of a cadre of nukes with an "I'm on a mission from God" world view scares the hell out of me.

Ex Output:
NEG


Ex Input:
Don't Judge This Book By Its Cover! . I'd seen the movie "Valley of the Dolls," whose characters are pictured on the cover of this book, but only recently did I read Jacqueline Susann's magnum opus.  What a pleasant surprise! This engaging novel, despite its length, is a fast read.  It is better -- far better -- than the film. (The movie, however, is a "must see" for its over-the-top acting, 60's fashions and "so bad it's good" storyline.)      Although initially billed (to great effect) as a steamy romance novel, the book is much more substantive.  Each of the characters is well-developed, and each has human flaws that lead to her success or spell her undoing.  Before it was fashionable, Susann used the character of Anne Welles to explore one woman's attempt to ignore the pressures to marry early and instead devote herself to a career.  Susann examined the problem of the abuse of legal drugs at a time when it was seen as primarily a teenage phenomenon.  Neely O'Hara is initially a sympathetic character, but has enough of the "bitter greens" (envy, jealousy and bile) which, when added to an insatiable ego and a large quantity of pills, leads to  her rise and fall.  And Jennifer North knows what she has and knows its advantages -- and limitations.  These characters are real, and one need not be in show business to know them.    Although written in 1966 (with a story that begins in 1945), the plotline is not dated.  Neither is the message: Susann asks whether having everything you ever wanted really is the key to happiness.  There is a reason why this book has remained a bestseller and continues to enthrall a new generation of readers.

Ex Output:

POS