I was upset that you were calling it nonfiction. Its political OPINION and thats all it will ever be. Obviously there is no right answer when it comes to politics,and saying it is nonfiction, like a history book, gives the impression that you were trying to say your opinion is better than mine.
I could have misunderstood though.
'Dark Star Safari' by Paul Theroux
Videomann, what do you mean by this: "If you can find the book" ??
Non-fiction means that is not made up. Opinion is supposed to be based on facts not on what someone thinks. Opinion based on what one thinks rather than facts is being a charlatan. When you go to the Bookstore tell them to remove all books of politics out of the non-fiction area...I think they will have a good laugh.
there is no right answer when it comes to politics
No that is not true. Politics can be analyzed for being right or wrong. History is supposed to teach you exactly that. The whole point of recording history is not to verify a whole bunch of facts but to tell a story based on facts that can serve as a lesson for newer policy. It is a lesson of right and wrong to prevent future mistakes or make wiser decisions in society. 
I cannot say that MY OPINION is better than yours because I have to listen to what you are saying and on what facts you based that. All I said was the book I was reading , what it was about, and what category it falls under.
--------------
"If you can find the book"
The book is sold out in some places.
We should have had a preemptive strike on this thread before it got out of hand.
Well, it is not out of hand. You don't call a hurricane simply because there is some drizzle. Don't be the boy that cried wolf. Get a hold of yourself, life can be much tougher.
Originally posted by VideoMann@Apr 8 2003, 04:13 AM... Get a hold of yourself, life can be much tougher.
You don't say. I thought the most strife I could possibly ever face would be in an internet forum. Boy, what shall I ever do in the real world?!!
Lighten up.
I am now reading "Empire" by Antonio Negri and Michael Hardt, "The Revenge of the Babysit"- Calvin and Hobbes and some William Gibson of course to keep my fantasy running 
Videomann, maybe I'm wrong, but I sense traces of arrogance in your postings, that you don't care much about others' opinions and you have a tendency to assign labels to people who disagree with you.
To be honest, I do it, too... I believe that I'm always right and others are plain inferiors and what they think is stupid, but prefer to hide it if there is no reason to express it. I joined this forum in order to learn a few things and co-operate with others, accepting that they may be totally different from me.
Try cracking a smile when you reply to a fool out there. And forgive me if I misunderstood you. Maybe it's my bad english, or anything...
Have a nice day!
Ken
I'm going to Barnes and Noble tomorrow.
Sorry for my ignorance but, what Barnes and Nobles are?
Originally posted by Ender@Apr 8 2003, 04:20 PM
I'm going to Barnes and Noble tomorrow.Sorry for my ignorance but, what Barnes and Nobles are?
That's a chain of bookstores in the USA
My cousin is a partner at Delbanco bookcompany. She is one of three people that own it.
I read many books, but the best I have read is:
"Mister God, this is Anna" by Fynn.
The books I'm reading:
The Consumer by M. Gira
The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle by Haruki Murakami
Every Tongue Got To Confess by Zora Neale Hurston
Has anyone ever read the Myst series, M-Y-S-T. You know, the story behind the incredible, award-winning Myst computer game?? I have read one, and it was pretty good. I am looking forward to reading the other two in the series.
It has a very interesting plot and well-developed characters. Great book if anyone likes science-fiction. 
I just started "The Sorrow of War". Im reading it on a recommendation and its really depressing. Its about the Vietnam war, written by a vietnamesse.
P.S. Videomann: I guess we'll have to disagree on the politics thing. You think that someones political opinion can be right definitively, i dont. So how about the abortion argument (not that I want to argue about it), do you really think someone can be declared definitively right? Politics are based on ethics when you get down to it, which is usually based on religion, which is usualy contradictory, so whos right?
Haha, People still read? J/k I read, but it normally will take a REALLY GOOD book to get me going. Im every so slowly getting through the First "Left Behind" book. Its a really interesting outlook on the apocolypse! Great stuff I think. O yeah, and do Dilbert Comic Strip Books count lol? Cause I have like 40 of those!
Nothing beats my Asterix collection!!! (except for an Asterix collection in French, with hard covers etc)
Ken:
I sense traces of arrogance in your postings,
Your senses betray you...arrogance is the last thing a scoundrel yells when faced with the truth. We Americans rely on facts not on philosophical exercises that lead nowhere as many French do.
For a definition of arrogance look at French politics and social behavior.
----------------------
PS.
Contrasutra
abortion argument = is not politics in the strict sense, it is a religious problem.
I don't know where you are from but the law says abortion is legal here in the U.S. and in just about most of the western world. Even in those countries that was illegal in the last 50 yrs. it is now legal. Simply because you or someone else doesn't like it does not make it wrong. "Abortion rights" are legaly right therefore if you want to make abortion illegal and a political issue then what you are saying you don't like the law and you cannot accept being wrong. When you live in a democracy you abide by accepting the majority opinion. Until you change the minds of the majority you are politically wrong and moraly wrong in the eyes of that society. If that doesn't suit you then you can live in another country that has rules and laws similar to your thinking. This is a big differerence between most Muslim countries and western countries. The majority of the people decide what is morally and legaly right not a group of clerics or a loud minority.
Politics are based on ethics when you get down to it, which is usually based on religion, which is usualy contradictor
No! wrong again. Politics is based on different ideas that must be formed into agreed points and guidelines where policy and laws can be made for all to abide by. Religion and ethics is just a small component of politics. You don't define yourself just as a being that eats and goes to the bathroom, I hope. Politics must and does consider economics, health, security, government and individual rights well before and on top of religion or ethics.
Don't throw another political question, because that is not what this thread is about.
YEAH! Take that! Lol, just had to step in and help out my fellow republican here. 
Oh, I didn't know it was a chain of bookstores Oh please, no more politics... I can read a short post, but it is very late here and I cannot go through with VideoMann's... And after all this thread is about what book are you reading and not about writting one...
Good night
Originally posted by VideoMann@Apr 8 2003, 11:01 PMYour senses betray you...arrogance is the last thing a scoundrel yells when faced with the truth. We Americans rely on facts not on philosophical exercises that lead nowhere as many French do.
Arrogance may have not been the best word to describe it. I just feel when I read your messages that you're sitting on a judge's chair saying who is right and who's wrong.
I was not talking about all Americans as not all Americans think, speak and behave the same way. I wanted you to consider my message as a friendly advice, although I see that you've already rejected it.
Have a nice day!
Ken
P.S.: I don't give a damn about the French ("who rely on philosophical exercises that lead nowhere")
Am I saying we purposely go by our ethics, not always. But every decision we make is because of our moral values. If you felt Abortion was unethical, would you really be for it, even if it was legal? I am American, and I am FOR abortion, I am playing devils advocat here.
This country was founded by religious men who believed in MORAL conduct. They felt that everyone was equal and that we all had "human rights". Thats a religious/ethical belief. (even though they stole it from John Locke)
But this has to end, we agree with each other. We both WANT the politics to be non-objective, I am just not as optimistic as you.
In the end, we MUST go by what we think is right, and not by the majority, because thats the only thing that makes sense. I refer you to the bridge incident, if everyone else was jumping off it, would you?
No, would you, please! J/K.
And im done.
Originally posted by contrasutra@Apr 9 2003, 01:49 AMI refer you to the bridge incident, if everyone else was jumping off it, would you?
No, would you, please!
WOULDN'T YOU!!!????
In the end, we MUST go by what we think is right, and not by the majority, because thats the only thing that makes sense.
Then you do not believe or respect democracy and you do not believe in being a lawful abiding citizen, since you say : "We must go by what we think is right and not the majority". You may go on what you think is right until the majority stops you and throws you in the slammer. You seem to think that you are more wise and important than the majority conscensus. I don't think so but you are free to exercise your free will until somebody stops you. The kind of position you state reminds me of why we have crazy people murdering doctors because they don't like the present abortion laws. You are not to follow your conscious to the point of breaking the law simply because you do not like the law.
People that want to live according only to their own principles that do not go along with the rest do not belong in society but belong living alone in some deserted spot where no government can touch them. Being a member of society and civilization means your contract is to obey the law at all times expecially when you do not like it. In democracies you have the right to use your vote to change things or to demonstrate peacefully without breaking any laws.
I refer you to the bridge incident, if everyone else was jumping off it, would you?
You refer to the bridge incident? What incident? Are you going to refer to Santa Claus and Rudolf the Red Nose Deer too?
When you find a majority of people that are acting rationally and make a decision and you want to remain part of that group then you must respect that decision or move out of the group. If a person has deep issues with how the government represents him and he constantly find himself not agreeing with the majority then leave the country. People leave their country for political reasons you know? Maybe you should rent the movie Massada ?
If you felt Abortion was unethical, would you really be for it, even if it was legal?
Being for it has nothing to do. Your job as a citicizen is to obey the law of the land. You have no say what somebody should or should not be doing except at the ballot box. If a person wants to have an abortion and it is legal, it becomes none of your business anymore than somebody being black wanting to attend a particular school. You may not like it but that is different from not obeying the law. As I have always said...your rights end where the rights of others begin. You may demonstrate in the streets but don't get delusional that simply because you find a few friends all of a sudden your point of view is a majority or the moral thing to do. The law for all of us is made at the ballot box, or Congress not in the streets parading.
The title of the thread is 'What Book Is Everyone Reading?', so please stick to the topic.
[cartman's voice]Respect my authoritaaaa![/voice]
Aqua-Soft Forums