Teddy wrote books about something other than himself!
Posted By: Old part-timer on 2008-10-25
In Reply to: How Palin pales in comparison to Teddy Roosevelt. - Let me count the ways.....sm
You can hardly compare Obama's narcissistic biographies with Teddy's books where he researched and wrote about something other than himself!
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
So far as I know there is not a law on the books...
against killing cattle...or hogs...but there IS one about killing humans.
I thought there was already a law on the books about...
the drivers licenses...I thought that was already passed as a law, to be implemented by 2008? What I read about it, it is not actually a national driver's license per se, but makes the states comply with the same set of rules (and that IS needed) about dispensing driver's licenses. I didn't read anything about Homeland Security. I guess they could be changing it, as the states were lamenting they thought they could not get ready for it that fast. However, when I moved to the state I now reside in, they were already doing the birth certificate thing and that was four years ago. To change my DL from the state I was moving from to where I moved I had to provide my birth certificate and it had to be the original or a copy with state seal, to prove I was a US citizen. And again, that was four years ago. But, as we all know, not all states are that vigilant.
As to the email and the phone conversations....I think that is blown out of proportion. I don't think the government has the time or the inclination to listen in to everyone's phone calls or read everyone's emails. I would bore them to death in 15 minutes. I was under the impression that they still had to have a judge's order (albeit they can get them much faster) to do that.
Okay...no big government, I get that. Can we extend that to social programs as well, and keep big government out of my pockets, while we are at it?
I think, if you look around, the billionaires in business are regulated. Tat is one of the reasons so much of it went to China (thank you Bill Clinton),and other countries. That's why the billionaires in Hollyweird now go to Canada to make films instead of keeping the money at home (while all the time telling us how much they care about the *common people*). And flying all over creation, which each east to west coast flight dumps more carbon into the atmosphere than a year's worth of most cars. I'm sorry, I don't think liberals are doing a great job on conservation either, Lurker. CLinton and Gore had 8 years to do something...I don't see where they did much either, frankly.
new phone books with
much larger print.
its more than losing books
that concerns me. It is the mindset that her beliefs are the only true ones and that information and opinions that differ from hers should not be available to United States citizens. That is down-right mindblowing.
I have not read either of his books, but
I would be interested in seeing the whole paragraph at the very least that these were taken from, and better still the whole chapter. I'm not saying he isn't racist, but you can't just put out a sentence of 2 of what you want people to see.
I have a friend who is like Obama, her mother was white and her father black. All of the things I am reading from your post are somewhat similar to what she has said to me before. She never really felt like she belonged anywhere. She is lighter skinned so some of the black people she knew would question her about that, and she said she too would stop telling people because no matter what she would be treated different by some people. And, I have seen first hand with her, that some white people would treat her terribly because she had a black father. So she would start to have an animosity towards whites. Like he says in that sentence, sometimes she did feel that she would have to prove that she was "black enough" (her words) to some people. To prove that she was loyal to her father's race. Does that make her racist? I don't think so. She said, and I could see too as we grew up together, that it was really confusing to her growing up. She felt like she didn't really belong anywhere. Now, in her 30s, she said she has learned to just be herself for the first time. She is black and she is white, she tries not to associate to either but to both. She said sometimes it is still hard because with some people they want you to be one or the other.
The last part you have from Dreams of My Father - what is wrong with that? I am taking from it he is trying to be his own man, not trying to be like white men or brown men, and that he all the things he looks up to about being a black man are from the men listed.
The last sentence, like I said I would like to see the whole paragraph or section. But I have just 1 question for you - what is wrong with being a Muslim? I know some Muslims and they are peaceful and would never think of hurting anyone. I have never read it all but what I have seen of the Koran it advocates peace. It is unfortunate that the extremists of their religion are tainting everyone else. These extremists are using the Muslim religion to hide behind for their own hate and personal agenda. I am not Muslim, but lets not forget that there are plenty of Christian extremists too and I would never identify myself with one of them.
lots of books on this - even old ones
http://www.amazon.com/Fourth-Turning-Str-William/dp/0767900464/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1223520209&sr=8-1
How many of his books have you read?
nm
NY has had laws on the books for
over 5 years. No smoking just about anywhere except Indian-owned casinos and private clubs that do not have employees. No Smoking in bars, restaurants, etc.
I for one, love it!
Books have been written
on the insidious & frightening merging of the right wing (currently occupied by the republican party) and the Christian religion. Certainly there are individual exceptions, but the political party defines itself in large part by its religious beliefs, which as I understand from the media and from the posts on this very board, involves preservation of life at all costs, period. Here's a scary watch: The documentary "Jesus Camp."
As far as my world view being narrow, I would say that the difference is that I'm willing to let people believe whatever they want to believe, & if I don't like it I can change channels. As opposed to Christians (granted, maybe the most vocal ones, who are the only ones I've had occasion to hear), who do not appear to be satisfied until everyone thinks the way they do. I think everyone has a right to personal beliefs, but that right STOPS at the point where it infringes on my own. As opposed to Christians (ditto above reference) who seem quite happy to legislate the world to their own belief system. To me, that's what the narrowness involves.
His books are selling like hotcakes.
x
Well, if you want to call your idol's own books...
garbage...fine by me. Several of my posts have come directly from his books. Like his Marxist connections from day one. From his own mouth..errr pen. But of course, asking you to actually read his words would be wayyyy too much to ask wouldn't it?
Ohhhhbaaaamaaaaa.
My mother still has one of those ration books........ sm
but I believe it was from WWII rather than the earlier Great Depression. I can remember her telling me that things like leather, rubber, automobiles, and nylon were rationed also during WWII as the bulk of those things went for "The War Effort."
if you enjoy books about religion
you should read "Under the Banner of Heaven" by Jon Krakauer. It is about some of the fundamentalist Mormon beliefs -- and no, I am not bashing Mormons, just a lot of interesting history and insight into some of these zealots, not regular Mormons.
This so reminds me of one of those baby books
people put together for their first kid. Video of the delivery. Baby's handprint and footprint. Lock of hair from Baby's first haircut. Picture of Baby taking his first step. First tooth Baby loses, and on and on and on.....
What's the followup plan for the 200th day and the 300th? I'd like to pencil this on my calendar.
read the books of Daniel and sm
Revelation
Rupert Murdoch, GW, & Co. are buying up all her books LOL, sm
like they say the Scientologists buy Cruise's movie tickets. She is a good servant for those in the shadows, so I am sure she is highly paid, just like those gas bags Hannity, Limbaugh and O'Reilly. No one with a conscience would do what they do unless it involved a lot of money.
A couple of quotes from Obama books to consider
From Dreams of My Father:'I ceased to advertise my mother's race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites.'
From Dreams of My Father : 'I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother's race.'
From Dreams of My Father:'There was something about him that made me wary, a little too sure of himself, maybe. And white.'
From Dreams of My Father: 'It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names.'
From Dreams of My Father:'I never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn't speak to my own. It was into my father's image, the black man, son of Africa , that I'd packed all the attributes I sought in myself , the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, DuBois and Mandela.'
And FINALLY the Most damaging one of ALL of them!!!
From Audacity of Hope:'I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.'
I grew up Baptist, and we thoroughly studied both books
And, as always, we picked and chose that which we would apply to our lives, and how we would interpret what it said.
You know the only things I took away from my childhood religion?
"Love your sisters and brothers."
"Judge not, lest ye be judged."
"Do unto others as you would have done to you."
And having studied the Nag Hammadi library, which gave much, much more insight into what Jesus recommended, it seems as if that - believe it or not - is exactly what he meant.
So when you say someone is "wrong," you are judging them. When you are asking someone to change their lives to accommodate your beliefs, you are doing unto them something you're asking not be done to you. And I believe we can agree that love is unconditional (something I believe 1 Corinthians 13:1-13 alluded to), regardless of what other's choices are - even if you disagree with them.
Read Obama's two books, his own words...
and then come and tell us he is not a socialist leaning heavily toward Marxism...with a straight face. Just admit it, you know he is a socalist, leaning Marxist, and you don't care. Be honest with us and yourself.
The first time either Obama or Biden have to face other than softball questions and they run under the porch whining.
Whether or not someone leans Marxist is a valid question. That neither one of them has answered. Obama KNOWS what he is. He just doesn't want YOU to know what he is.
What you call so-called history is on the books
if you care to search for it. It is no secret Israel provided gun power to Hamas a long time ago to ward off the PLO......who do you think gave Israel all the weaponery to give to them? China? Then when Hamas becomes entrenched within the Palestinian people and over time basically becomes their government, what do you think they are going to do.....the same as many others that have been given weapons; they turn on the ones that put them there in the first place, simply because they feel no loyalty toward Israel...they hate Israel.....they hate Jews. Simple as that.
You act as if this is not facts. I don't know how old you are but if you are my age, you would certainly remember the PLO and all before them and everything after them. These terrorists groups didn't sprout overnight; they were made!
I don't for a minute think Hamas actually cares for their citizens; it's all a means to an end with them. They use their people as human shields because they are cowards but of course, when Israel kills their innocent, they can scream Israel is murdering their women and children; of course Hamas takes no responsibility for what they do.
Thanks Teddy :-)
I appreciate that and I hope someone can respond to the questions I raised.
Teddy
For Immediate Release: December 28, 2006
Contact: Carol Goldberg (202) 265-7337
HOW OLD IS THE GRAND CANYON? PARK SERVICE WON’T SAY — Orders to Cater to Creationists Makes National Park Agnostic on Geology
Washington, DC — Grand Canyon National Park is not permitted to give an official estimate of the geologic age of its principal feature, due to pressure from Bush administration appointees. Despite promising a prompt review of its approval for a book claiming the Grand Canyon was created by Noah's flood rather than by geologic forces, more than three years later no review has ever been done and the book remains on sale at the park, according to documents released today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).
“In order to avoid offending religious fundamentalists, our National Park Service is under orders to suspend its belief in geology,” stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch. “It is disconcerting that the official position of a national park as to the geologic age of the Grand Canyon is ‘no comment.’”
In a letter released today, PEER urged the new Director of the National Park Service (NPS), Mary Bomar, to end the stalling tactics, remove the book from sale at the park and allow park interpretive rangers to honestly answer questions from the public about the geologic age of the Grand Canyon. PEER is also asking Director Bomar to approve a pamphlet, suppressed since 2002 by Bush appointees, providing guidance for rangers and other interpretive staff in making distinctions between science and religion when speaking to park visitors about geologic issues.
In August 2003, Park Superintendent Joe Alston attempted to block the sale at park bookstores of Grand Canyon: A Different View by Tom Vail, a book claiming the Canyon developed on a biblical rather than an evolutionary time scale. NPS Headquarters, however, intervened and overruled Alston. To quiet the resulting furor, NPS Chief of Communications David Barna told reporters and members of Congress that there would be a high-level policy review of the issue.
According to a recent NPS response to a Freedom of Information Act request filed by PEER, no such review was ever requested, let alone conducted or completed.
Park officials have defended the decision to approve the sale of Grand Canyon: A Different View, claiming that park bookstores are like libraries, where the broadest range of views are displayed. In fact, however, both law and park policies make it clear that the park bookstores are more like schoolrooms rather than libraries. As such, materials are only to reflect the highest quality science and are supposed to closely support approved interpretive themes. Moreover, unlike a library the approval process is very selective. Records released to PEER show that during 2003, Grand Canyon officials rejected 22 books and other products for bookstore placement while approving only one new sale item — the creationist book.
Ironically, in 2005, two years after the Grand Canyon creationist controversy erupted, NPS approved a new directive on “Interpretation and Education (Director’s Order #6) which reinforces the posture that materials on the “history of the Earth must be based on the best scientific evidence available, as found in scholarly sources that have stood the test of scientific peer review and criticism [and] Interpretive and educational programs must refrain from appearing to endorse religious beliefs explaining natural processes.”
“As one park geologist said, this is equivalent of Yellowstone National Park selling a book entitled Geysers of Old Faithful: Nostrils of Satan,” Ruch added, pointing to the fact that previous NPS leadership ignored strong protests from both its own scientists and leading geological societies against the agency approval of the creationist book. “We sincerely hope that the new Director of the Park Service now has the autonomy to do her job.”
Read the PEER letter to NPS Director Bomar
View the NPS admission that no policy review on the creationist book has occurred
See the 2005 NPS Director’s Order #6 on Interpretation
8.4.2 Historical and Scientific Research. Superintendents, historians, scientists, and interpretive staff are responsible for ensuring that park interpretive and educational programs and media are accurate and reflect current scholarship…Questions often arise round the presentation of geological, biological, and evolutionary processes. The interpretive and educational treatment used to explain the natural processes and history of the Earth must be based on the best scientific evidence available, as found in scholarly sources that have stood the test of scientific peer review and criticism. The facts, theories, and interpretations to be used will reflect the thinking of the scientific community in such fields as biology, geology, physics, astronomy, chemistry, and paleontology. Interpretive and educational programs must refrain from appearing to endorse religious beliefs explaining natural processes. Programs, however, may acknowledge or explain other explanations of natural processes and events. (Emphasis added)
Trace how the creationist book controversy started and grew
Look at tax dollars used to support the Bush administration program of “Faith-Based Parks”
Teddy...sm
I've been on break from the board too. Seems the older I get the less patience for time for ad nauseum reposts. Life is too precious.
Teddy...
You don't have to change anything unless, of course, you want to. This is the liberral board and you can post anything (except of course, anything derogatory about W). I meant to post this yesterday but just did not get around to it. It is difficult to be in the middle of a barrage of slams. I know I will try to answer a post, then get 2 more posts that are going on about something else and then I try to answer those and then they are telling me I never answered their posts, and then they talk about you to each other on the board and say **you didn't answer my question. That is what the left does.**It is hard to keep up and keep a civil tongue (keyboard) when you are alone amongst the opposition. However, do not give up or leave. Sometimes I find it necessary to take some time away from here, but at the very least I can say I kept up with them....rather than **I'm done with you. You are delusional. I am not talking to you any more.** I get a lot of that. You are not alone here.
Why Teddy...did not know you were such a fan...
why didn't you post what those posts were in REPLY to? Talk about your selective posting. LOL.
Whatever, Teddy, whatever...
you trot out the condescending prattle, I get really tired. Bottom line, I don't believe you. If you think that means I am calling you a liar, that is your problem. Why you cannot get a simple explanation is beyond me. Do you think if a person lies about one thing, that makes a person a liar? I save the term "liar" for a person I know lies continuously. Every one of us on this board has lied at one time about something. Does that mean we are all liars?? Get a grip.
Are there any good books on *the radical terrorist mind*? sm
and whose the author?
you're wrong, S. FLA the illegals paid on the books
at least the ones I know.....the ones who did arrive with at least a visa.....and who get paid off a company payroll and not off the books or in cash is what I mean....
Tired Teddy....
You need to get a new shtick. The condescending has passed onto obnoxious...in other words, its gettin' tired, Teddy.
Yep...believe it or not, I really do know there is a written record of all posts. I just don't know how I am going to sleep at night worrying about how you feel about my posts. <--that last sentence was meant to be facetious, just to help you recognize it.
If you are trying to come across as snooty, you nailed it.
Have a good night.
Pardon me, Teddy....
but just because someone posts here what they do, does not mean they do it. And if I do not choose to blow my own horn and brag about all the wonderful things I do, please do not interpret that to mean that I do not do something. I am retired and therefore can no longer serve, that does not mean I have never served or if I was able to serve I would not be right there. Please do not preach to me about involvement. And please to answer my question. Why do you not take this peacenik talk to the people who threaten the peace? Unless of course you are a terrorist apologist who thinks the United States is the big bad wolf who causes all the problems. If you believe that, then you should be on the first plane out.
Last time I looked, I and no other American had flown a plane into a building and killed 3000 people in one day. Last time I looked, I or any other American had not bombed embassies, bombed the Cole, downed the plane over Lockerbie, bombed the World Trade Center the first time...you are sooo typical of the angry liberal...and so typical...*my boyfriend says* *Michael Moore says* *Lurker says* Have you ever, my friend, had an independent thought while your butt is sitting there comfy in in YOUR chair??
And please to do the research...there are a great many in Congress who have children serving right now. I know people personally who are serving right now or have children serving right now. You might want to jump back down off that high horse and check out your rancid statements.
As long as we are on butts...you make mine hurt.
Have a good day!!
Dear Teddy....
you are So very angry, because you are so frustrated. And the way you post is far from *sassy.* I will leave it at that.
I am going to go out on a limb here, Teddy....
We both believe what we say, even though total opposition. We are both convinced we are *right.* We are both worried about the future of the country. You get frustrated, I get frustrated. You can't imagine why I believe what I believe, I can't imagine why you believe what you believe....and so it goes. You get frustrated and lash out and I become the enemy. I get frustrated and bite my knuckles.
Let me try to make you understand where I am coming from on Bush and on the military. First let me say...I give due respect to anyone holding the office of the Presidency while they are in office, and I will until they disgrace it...like Nixon did by breaking the law, like Clinton did by breaking the law. I condemn both and let neither slide. The point being...now Bush is President. Congress authorized use of force and he did it. We have soldiers fighting as we speak. I support our military. I support our military no matter WHO is President. I supported our military during Nam and we had a Dem President also during that time, and when John Kennedy sent more troops to Nam I supported him. It is not necessary that the President not be a Democrat for me to support decisions. Understand this about me if you do not understand anything else...even if I did not think Congress was correct to authorize use of force, even if I did not think Bush was correct to exercise that right and send troops, the fact remains, THEY ARE THERE, and I will support them AND their mission until they come home, because their morale and their safety and their ability to win is more important than my personal opinion of the Congress or the President, whoever he (or she) might be.
I hope this somewhat clarifies where I come from at least on that issue.
No it doesn't Teddy. sm
I can see examples of not agreeing on the very first page and they are still there.
Bye, Teddy....until the next time....
you do a drive-by attack. Wish I could say it was good to see you again.  You have a GOOD day now!
Then what did you mean when you wrote
You accuse me of drinking and then cry when it happens to you. SM
WHAT happened to ME, Brunson Burnout?
Who wrote this??????
I just wrote him
do you think he will ever actually read it?
I am not the one who wrote it, but
probably meant PROMOTE, not promite.
I still say they should have just wrote a
check to every TAXPAYER for around $50,000. That would have saved a heck of a lot of money being spent on this stimulus package. We would definitely buy a car. Then we could concentrate on paying our bills off, which would have stimuluated the economy even more...LOL
I think he's the guy who wrote
The Purpose Driven (fill in the blank - there have been several.)
You're a class act, Teddy.
I hope you decide to stay. 
Excellent post, Teddy!
Thank you for your eloquent post. Hopefully, the trolls won't come out to tell you that you are guilty of treason and should leave the country because YOU are not willing to avert your eyes and do not pretend we do not commit atrocities.
You are in good company:
*Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere* Martin Luther King
*The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don't do anything about it* Albert Einstein
Another wonderful post, Teddy.
Obviously, no human being on earth can say with any degree of credibility that agnostics call out to Jesus when the time is near. Nobody can possibly know what every other person on earth calls out, if anything.
For some, peace comes from religion. Others are able to find peace within themselves. Some never find it. Each person must follow their heart and brain and find the niche that works best for them.
I guess Islamic fascists aren't the only ones who try to force their religion on everyone else. The difference is that the United States isn't supposed to favor one religion over another. We're supposed to be a nation that has religious freedom.
This is especially dangerous during a time when war with religious fanatics is involved. To pledge undying, unquestioning loyalty and support of Israel in political matters (even if some feel they have acted badly) soley for personal religious reasons (to insure one's place in heaven) is very dangerous to the United States and the rest of the world. This is why politics and religion don't mix, and this is why the United States is becoming such a scary place. :-(
You started the condescending, Teddy...
read your post again. It was very condescending. You talked down to me, and I thought it might be fun to respond from down there where you put me. You talked down to me and you were rude. You know it and I know it. I was just giving it back to you. Now that we are past the kid stuff, could you please answer my question, and enlighten me as to what the *big picture* was that I missed and leave the condescending attitude out of it. As to being a dumb condescending Polack...your words, and not mine...it is so hilarious to me the parallels. My guy is of Polack/German ancestry and he is standing behind me as I type, and we are enjoying a good laugh, so thank you from this Choctaw/Cherokee/Irish gal and her dumb Polack guy. LOL. We are looking forward to the *big picture* point, though.
Sorry....I meant for the above to post under Teddy's...
post below titled Viet Nam and WWII...sorry.
Teddy, give it a rest already. sm
We have, through the years, LONG before you were posting here, made a distinct difference between liberals and leftists. If you would actually read the posts, instead of reading Ann Coulter, which for some reason you feel a Clockwork Orangish type of inescapability to read, you would see that. But instead in post after post after post you go on and on with a litany of wrongs against the poor liberals on the conservative board. Give it a rest already. As far as your assertion that Vietnam and Korea were civil wars, well, I am not quite sure how to address that gigantic historial distortion. I won't even try.
Teddy, you are not the board moderator. sm
And liberals are posting on the conservative board and do you see us ordering them off? You really have no tolerance. And by the way, the little article about dissention in the ranks, it seems all isn't what it appears to be. Shocker there.
http://newsbusters.org/
And Teddy Roosevelt is turning over in his sm
grave about the so-called Republicans nowdays...
If anyone knows who Lifelong Democrat is, Teddy...
it would certainly be YOU. Funny how the posts and attitude are so SIMILAR. If anyone cares to, they can go back and compare. The alter egos all like to do the same thing....hide behind different monikers and take pot shots. It is easy to tell, looking at all the postings here, what is going on. As to sarcasm, accusation and putdown...anyone who reads my initial post and then those of LLD and now this one can tell who is the queen of that mode. I would invite anyone to check out the LLD and Teddy posts, among others, and they will know the truth. Most of the posters here on the Liberal board are not of that mindset.
I never said all the posters on the liberal board were one person, and I did not say it last night. Funny how when it was mentioned *Teddy* showed up. I know its you and you know its you. Most of the other posters know its you. And for some reason you have a real problem with me and love to swoop in and attack, and the posts are always the same. Condescending, holier-than-thou....it's like a signature. Methinks she doth protest too much.
For the record, Teddy/Taiga....
the rest of the post said when it wasn't in response to what had been thrown at me first. Methinks you are very guilty of what you always accuse me of....cutting and pasting out of context. Teddy is taking over again.
Yes, I did, Teddy....read the whole post.
I said show some that were not responses to baits or barbs thrown at me by piglet primarily. That is exactly what I said. Again, out of context.
As to Teddy/Taiga...I knew you only as Teddy (and a few other monikers by style of posting), and I do lean back toward that moniker when the posts lean in that direction, because under that moniker is when you were more likely to bait, demean, and ridicule. In short, "Teddy" seemed to be more "cranky" more often than does "Taiga."
As to posting as Observer....I don't know about that. No one was posting as Observer when I started posting using that moniker. Which has been quite some time now.
As to when someone does it first, why respond in kind? For a long time I did not. But I guess, like you, after a prolonged period of being baited, demeaned, and ridiculed, I got "cranky" too and responded in kind. So I guess we have that in common. Like I said...I am learning at the feet of the masters.
Some who post here tho, do not appear to be "cranky." Baiting, demeaning, and ridiculing seem to be in their nature (hence the Ann Coulter of the liberal board comment). I don't appreciate Ann Coulter's brand of humor either, by the way. I don't find baiting, demeaning, and ridiculing amusing. By anyone, on any side of any aisle.
|
