Thu, Jan 29, 2015, 4:45 PM EST - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

American Capital, Ltd. Message Board

  • luktrot luktrot Sep 4, 2008 6:44 PM Flag

    Palin Hates Reading

    Here is a list of the many great books Palin tried to have banned as mayor in Alaska:

    A Clockwork Orange by Anthony Burgess
    A Wrinkle in Time by Madeleine L’Engle
    Annie on My Mind by Nancy Garden
    As I Lay Dying by William Faulkner
    Blubber by Judy Blume
    Brave New World by Aldous Huxley
    Bridge to Terabithia by Katherine Paterson
    Canterbury Tales by Chaucer
    Carrie by Stephen King
    Catch-22 by Joseph Heller
    Christine by Stephen King
    Confessions by Jean-Jacques Rousseau
    Cujo by Stephen King
    Curses, Hexes, and Spells by Daniel Cohen
    Daddy’s Roommate by Michael Willhoite
    Day No Pigs Would Die by Robert Peck
    Death of a Salesman by Arthur Miller
    Decameron by Boccaccio
    East of Eden by John Steinbeck
    Fallen Angels by Walter Myers
    Fanny Hill (Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure) by John Cleland
    Flowers For Algernon by Daniel Keyes
    Forever by Judy Blume
    Grendel by John Champlin Gardner
    Halloween ABC by Eve Merriam
    Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone by J.K. Rowling
    Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets by J.K. Rowling
    Harry Potter and the Prizoner of Azkaban by J.K. Rowling
    Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire by J.K. Rowling
    Have to Go by Robert Munsch
    Heather Has Two Mommies by Leslea Newman
    How to Eat Fried Worms by Thomas Rockwell
    Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain
    I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings by Maya Angelou
    Impressions edited by Jack Booth
    In the Night Kitchen by Maurice Sendak
    It’s Okay if You Don’t Love Me by Norma Klein
    James and the Giant Peach by Roald Dahl
    Lady Chatterley’s Lover by D.H. Lawrence
    Leaves of Grass by Walt Whitman
    Little Red Riding Hood by Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm
    Lord of the Flies by William Golding
    Love is One of the Choices by Norma Klein
    Lysistrata by Aristophanes
    More Scary Stories in the Dark by Alvin Schwartz
    My Brother Sam Is Dead by James Lincoln Collier and Christopher Collier
    My House by Nikki Giovanni
    My Friend Flicka by Mary O’Hara
    Night Chills by Dean Koontz
    Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck
    On My Honor by Marion Dane Bauer
    One Day in The Life of Ivan Denisovich by Alexander Solzhenitsyn
    One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest by Ken Kesey
    One Hundred Years of Solitude by Gabriel Garcia Marquez
    Ordinary People by Judith Guest
    Our Bodies, Ourselves by Boston Women’s Health Collective
    Prince of Tides by Pat Conroy
    Revolting Rhymes by Roald Dahl
    Scary Stories 3: More Tales to Chill Your Bones by Alvin Schwartz
    Scary Stories in the Dark by Alvin Schwartz
    Separate Peace by John Knowles
    Silas Marner by George Eliot
    Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.
    Tarzan of the Apes by Edgar Rice Burroughs
    The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain
    The Adventures of Tom Sawyer by Mark Twain
    The Bastard by John Jakes
    The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger
    The Chocolate War by Robert Cormier
    The Color Purple by Alice Walker
    The Devil’s Alternative by Frederick Forsyth
    The Figure in the Shadows by John Bellairs
    The Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck
    The Great Gilly Hopkins by Katherine Paterson
    The Handmaid’s Tale by Margaret Atwood
    The Headless Cupid by Zilpha Snyder
    The Learning Tree by Gordon Parks
    The Living Bible by William C. Bower
    The Merchant of Venice by William Shakespeare
    The New Teenage Body Book by Kathy McCoy and Charles Wibbelsman
    The Pigman by Paul Zindel
    The Seduction of Peter S. by Lawrence Sanders
    The Shining by Stephen King
    The Witches by Roald Dahl
    The Witches of Worm by Zilpha Snyder
    Then Again, Maybe I Won’t by Judy Blume
    To Kill A Mockingbird by Harper Lee
    Twelfth Night by William Shakespeare
    Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary by the Merriam-Webster Editorial Staff
    Witches, Pumpkins, and Grinning Ghosts: The Story of the Halloween Symbols by Edna Barth

    Don't believe me, click here:
    http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1837918,00.html

    And click here:
    http://www.librarian.net/stax/2366/sarah-palin-vp-nominee/

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Wriskit < That income [Rangels] is taxable to the Bahamian government, not the US government. You should know that. His accountant did not report income that is not taxable >

      "The congressman [Rangel] may owe some back state and New York City taxes," Rangel's lawyer Lanny Davis said.

      Comrade Wriskit you forgot that, so I thought, with soul, I'd remind you.

      You are right about at least one thing Comrade, and that is that some of us "may" have a soul. The rest have sold out to Satan, and their soul is no longer theirs. Omissions of the truth, distortions of the truth, tax evasion, and other corruption, and excuses for it, are a tip off.

      Rangel's most recent excuse is that the papers were in Spanish. LOL!!!!! What's your excuse Comrade Wriskit?

    • Still reeling over Tennee's defense of the most extreme pro-life position by citing that it had been the view of society for the past 200 years, I did a quick time travel back 2 centuries to ask John Stuart Mills, noted English thinker, his take on the subject of freedom from intrusion and in his essay on liberty, and he said:

      No society in which these liberties are not, on the whole, respected, is free, whatever may be its form of government; and none is completely free in which they do not exist absolute and unqualified. The only freedom which deserves the name, is that of pursuing our own good in our own way, so long as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs, or impede their efforts to obtain it. Each is the proper guardian of his own health, whether bodily, or mental or spiritual. Mankind are greater gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to themselves, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest.

      The last sentence sums it up but the preceding words give it more meat.

    • Carny pretty neatly sums it all up about the difficulties in trying to decide when human life starts. Religious beliefs often oversimplify complex processes to make things easier for the faithful to get the message. But just because a certain way of thought is 200, or 500, or 1000 years old, we should not change it is just silly if new knowledge and understanding come along.

      Human beings are a mammalian species that shares many attributes with other mammals and to lesser degrees with most other animals in the animal kingdom. The idea that at conception, the embryo-fetus-unborn human is equal to the mother in its humanity leaves us with a dilemma. In any late pregnancy triage situation when only one can be saved, whom do we choose? Modern society has decided. The fully existing life of the mother is saved over the beginning life of the unborn infant. In any earlier stages up to 6 months, in case of rape, incest, harm to the health of the mother, or fetal damage, if the mother so decides, the lower status embryo-fetus-unborn human can be aborted ending the pregnancy.

      No one chooses abortion lightly. The fewer abortions the better. Knowledge of birth control and contraception need to be taught to all young people so those who are sexually active know how to avoid unwanted conceptions.

    • According to recent polls white women are coming aboard the Palin express.... looks like they are getting past their initial Mandingo fantasy.

    • Hey T98_99,

      Appreciate your thoughtful response.

      Don't necessarily agree with you, but will cogitate on what you've said.

      Look for a more detailed rebuttal in the next few days.

      Thanks,

      Mike

    • Actually you are wrong.
      Factcheck.org

      It is an internet scam. Do you feel silly?

    • "The unborn human is a human. Simple. By the way, this WAS the law of the land for almost 200 years. And, it has been understood for all of history. Only recently have we decided differently."

      ius necandi

    • no support for the allegation was apparent at either of the linked sites.

      OTOH, i have a reading list for the rest of the year. i have read scarcely half of those books

    • Mike,

      Interesting thoughts, but here is my position.

      If a woman is impregnated by a man (through sex or invitro or whatever) the result is a developing human being. Approximately 40 weeks later a baby is born. During the 40 weeks in the womb, the human was developing as it is supposed to develop, as humans have developed throughout all of recorded history, in the safety of the womb.

      Any other explanation, definition, term (fetus, etc) is BS. It's a baby.

      You, and others, can come up with all the weird examples, caveats, etc. that you want to, and the facts don't change. It's a baby. And, babies deserve to live.

      You wrote: "I think that every living human being has the right to determine the disposition of their own body during their lifetime, all others be damned."

      You may find this suprising, but I agree with you. But, here's the difference: An unborn baby is a separate, distinct, unique, separate DNA, etc. BODY that just happens to reside in the womb of the woman. That's just the way it works.

      But, since the unborn baby can't speak for itself, someone has to speak for them.

      And, I know lots of people who would be happy to adopt. Today. Tomorrow.

      Bottom line, an unborn human is worthy of life as much as any human walking around. The only difference is that the one walking around had the chance to be born.

      Take care.

    • T98_99,

      "The unborn human is a human. Simple."

      Hey Tennesee,

      You've been fairly level-headed in the past, and I have (and still do) looked forward towards your posts.

      Have to tell you here that I don't agree with your "simplistic" statement.

      It seems to me you are asserting that "any" issue of a female human womb is a "human" regardless of parentage.

      It doesn't seem to matter to you if the issue results from rape, incest, or the scientific implantation of a wooly mammoth embryo.

      I don't agree with your position here.

      I think that every living human being has the right to determine the disposition of their own body during their lifetime, all others be damned.

      This is one of the main reasons why I will continue to support the effort of the world wide study to permit mammalians of any form to be born from either male or female human bodies.

      Based on your comments you may not be aware of this effort, which is simply a study to ensure that mammalian species at risk can survive into the future.

      As it happens, it turns out that it's not so hard to do as all mammalian embryos start out needing the same womb environment, regardless of species. It also turns out that a pseudo-womb can be constructed within a male-human, in the peritoneal conclave.

      So my questions to you are these:

      1. Assume a human male is impregnated in his peritoneal area with a 1-month old human embryo from a petri dish. This particular embryo embodies the genes of of two nearly extinct tribes of South American indians. Three months in he chickens out, decides to stop the process. Whould you support the prosecution of this male member of the species for murder?
      2. Assume a human female is impregnated in her womb with a rare vanishing species of the earth (perhaps a Siberian tiger embryo). The human female ends up feeling pretty good about prolonging the existance of a rare and vanishing speicies of mammals, and ends up giving birth. Should the cub be killed on it's birth as it represents an anathemena to God?

      I ask these questions not to offend you, but merely to point out that the line between all life forms on earth is thin... especially with respect to mammals.

      What would you say if a mare (a female horse) were to give birth to a "human"?

      This can (or is likely to be) done.

      I know that the above sounds weird, but it is coming at us... it will happen in some form.

      My real question is, will you adhere to your statement "The unborn human is a human. Simple."?

      Personnaly, I am not sure how simple it is.

      Mike

    • View More Messages
 
ACAS
14.23-0.010(-0.07%)4:00 PMEST

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.