Beginning on April 14th, 2007, a firestorm blew through the Internet community with the search engine optimization (SEO) community burning the hottest. The embers were warm and waiting for a strong wind to blow and kick up the flames, but it took Matt Cutts, the Google engineer extraordinaire to fire the flames with an off-the-cuff comment about "paid links."
The flames raged and in most forums, the wind quickly shifted moving the firestorm back towards Cutts and Google. Thread Watch offered the most biting rebuttal to Cutts' comments: http://www.threadwatch.org/node/13925 and http://www.threadwatch.org/node/13941
Aaron Wall at Thread Watch is a respectable fellow, and he tore into Google with a ferociousness that I had not anticipated. Matt Cutts tried to answer some of Aaron's questions, but it seemed that Cutts' rebuttals only added more fuel to the fire.
I would not have wanted to be in Matt Cutts' shoes that week. Oh my, it was brutal!
Even on Cutts' own blog where the "paid link" comment originally surfaced (http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/hidden-links/), Danny Sullivan posted a question that went unanswered, so Sullivan commented about it on his site: http://searchengineland.com/070420-111550.php
Search Engine Watch even mentioned this issue and linked to additional forums where the debate was raging: http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/blog/070416-020746
What Most Readers Took From Cutts' Comments
There were only a few readers who took Matt Cutts' comments to be brotherly-advice.
The vast majority of people were screaming that Google intended to exercise their "monopoly control" over the Internet to run all of their competitors out of business.
Generally, I am not a "reactionary" type person. But for about an hour, even I had a ball in the pit of my stomach.
The ball passed from the pit of my stomach when I read a post that mirrored an opinion I have openly written about numerous times before: How does Google determine the "intent" of a person making a link? They can't!
Understanding The Nuances Of Similar Items
Some people suggest that I should be ashamed of myself for speculating about the future of Google's algorithms. There is even one clown, who has suggested that I should fear mentioning Matt Cutts' name in an article, because I am bound to draw Cutts' ire against me and my businesses. But, I am not worried.
I am simply laying out my "speculative" opinion about what Cutts' comments might mean to my business and yours. You are free to use your own brain to judge the value of my words.
Am I playing a double standard when I say that Google cannot determine the intent of the person placing a link, and then I comment on how I interpret the future of the Google search algorithms? I don't think so, and let me tell you why.
Google uses algorithms (software programs) to make distinctions about what a web page is about, how they value that page, and to judge the nature of a link.
I use my intellect (or as some would suggest, my lack thereof) to make a judgment about what Google has told us we should expect from them in the future.
I trust software to a certain extent, but software cannot always read the nuance that separates two very similar items. So, how can the Google algorithm be expected to determine the intent of a person who placed a link?
It has always been my contention that humans are "required" in any process that must make an interpretation of nuance. In my businesses, we refuse to trust computers to make judgments of nuance, because they can't. That is the reason we employ human beings to process orders.
What Is Google's Intent Behind The Paid Links Issue?
The whole of Cutts' argument seems to hinge on nixing "paid links" that are designed to manipulate or "game Google's PageRank" and to a lesser extent, their organic search results. Google seems to be really agitated that webmasters are "selling links based on the PageRank value of a page."
The problem is that webmasters are selling an intangible asset that is wholly owned by Google and maintained for "Google's benefit." Webmasters are selling this Google asset, but Google will not receive any of the proceeds from that sale.
As a result, Cutts suggested that webmasters should use some method that Google's spider can use to recognize and distinguish "paid links" from "given links." Since Google's algorithm is based on the theory that links are given to websites that deserve those links, the paid links on high PageRank pages can really skew Google's PageRank values and its organic search results.
Here Is Where It Gets Ugly
Both honest and dishonest people inhabit this Internet.
Google wants webmasters who are selling links to distinguish paid links from given links, so that Google can ignore "links purchased to influence PageRank."
If honest people distinguish paid links in a way that Google can recognize, then the market demand for those links will dry up. Once the PageRank value of a link is taken away from the buyer, the buyer will be forced to purchase links based only on the traffic that the specific web page receives. If all paid link decisions were based only on a web page's traffic, then the market value of a link would be decimated.
Once a webmaster tells his link-buying customers that his or her links will no longer carry PageRank value to the buyer's website, then the value of that link will drop in most cases by 80% or more. Why would a webmaster want to reduce the market value of his links by 80%?
Although Google's links do not pass PageRank to the websites that are in their index or paid listings, we have to ask ourselves one thing. Would Google be willing to take a step that would reduce the market value of their own links by 80%? They certainly would not do anything that would cut their own bottom line that deeply, yet they are asking webmasters to do just that.
This is the reason people are teed off at Google. At least 80% of the market value of a link is driven by the PageRank value of the web page where the link will be placed.
Dishonest people don't care to play by the rules; they will continue to sell their PageRank value, as long as they continue to have buyers. Only the honest will suffer.
Link Buyers Are Green With Envy
Link Buyers are envious of the PageRank value given to other web pages, and they want a bit of that value passed over to their own websites.
Link buyers are green with envy, because they can see that little green bar in the top of their browser that tells them how much value Google gives a web page in its algorithms.
If Google were to keep PageRank as a private value, known only to them, then "paid links" would not be an issue for them to manage.
If the public cannot see what a page's PageRank value is, then link buyers would not be able to use PageRank to influence their link buying decisions, and webmasters would not be able to market their PageRank value to other websites.
How Simple Is That?
All Google has to do to solve this problem of theirs, is to take away the indicator people use to buy and sell PageRank.
Someone suggested to me that Google would never do away with the PageRank indicator in their toolbar, because Google feels that it is the only thing that ensures that people will keep the Google toolbar in their browser. Personally, I will continue to use the Google toolbar for my searches, even if the PageRank indicator was not there, because I like the search results Google gives to me. But that is just my opinion, and I am only one person out of millions of Google toolbar users.
What it boils down to is this. If Google is serious about nixing schemes to buy and sell PageRank, then they would simply take their PageRank indicator away from us. But will they take it away? Only time will tell.
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
A Brief History of Tapestries in American Décor
The myriad details of restoring or furnishing a period house are enough to overwhelm even the most dedicated homeowner. Paint colors, wood finishes, floor covering, lighting fixtures; chosen wisely, these elements can combine to produce a satisfying authenticity. The selection of appropriate textiles can add a visual and textural dimension, a finishing touch of comfort and warmth. Tapestries, in particular, can be used effectively in almost any period home. Tapestries have been important elements in American interior design both early and late. They were the height of fashion in the 17th and late 19th centuries, and maintained a more modest popularity during the intervening periods. Early use in American décor In the 17th century, colonists, as British citizens, were determined to be as refined in the Colonies as their countrymen in the Mother Country. The wealthy and socially conscious remained in vogue as much as time and distance allowed, importing English fashions and goods to the growing urban centers. European-made tapestries were often listed among the most valuable items in estate inventories of the wealthy. As either wall hangings or bed hangings, they were admired by visitors; during this period, the best bed, splendidly adorned with rich tapestry art, was found more often in the parlor than the bedroom or “chamber.” From the early 18th century to the late 19th, rich fabrics, including tapestries, were used in parlors and “best rooms,” but less frequently on walls. The British artist Charles Eastlake, widely read in America in the mid-19th century, cautioned that wall tapestries may be at risk in homes in dirty, industrialized cities, where they lacked protection from soot, coal dust, and smoke, but their popularity persisted as furniture coverings. A popular option for Americas wealthy By the late 19th century, American industry had given rise to unprecedented wealth, held (and liberally spent) by families such as the Vanderbilts, Astors, and others. Perceiving themselves as the American aristocracy, they built both urban and country homes (the latter often referred to as “cottages’) modeled after European palaces and grand estates. Tapestries were an important element in the decorative scheme of such grand houses as George Washington Vanderbilt’s Biltmore, the dining room of which featured two massive 16th century tapestries of Vulcan and Venus as the focal point. Like their Colonial counterparts, the 19th century American “royalty” sought to display their very new wealth even as they imitated the interior design fashions of centuries before. The revival in tapestry art In less luxurious homes, tapestries were literally off the wall, appearing more often as drapery or upholstery fabric, or as a decorative covering for a table, piano, or mantel. Portieres, lambrequins, and valences often used jacquard-woven tapestry fabric to enrich a decorative scheme, providing texture, color, and visual interest. William Morris and his cohorts in the Arts and Crafts movement re-introduced tapestry as both an art form and an element in interior design, and it was once again seen in homes on both sides of the Atlantic. The fashion was short-lived, however, and little innovation in tapestry design appeared for several decades. A revival of interest in tapestry art began in the mid-20th century. As modern architecture became more austere, large, unbroken walls presented the opportunity for colorful and textural tapestry, executed in designs far removed from the picturesque motifs of centuries before. As an alternative to framed paintings, tapestry art was valued for its portability in an age of increasing mobility. Individuals and families moved from apartment to modest home to larger home as their circumstances changed; tapestries could be folded or rolled and easily moved, to be hung in a new setting. Popular in any period home While the popularity of tapestry as a design element has varied throughout American history, the wide range of available motifs and ways to use these intricate, often striking textiles allow for the homeowner to be creative with their use, resulting in an unexpected focal point, large or small, in any period home.
The Politics Of The American Dream
The American Dream is the promise to have it all and enjoy it all. It's been glorified and sentimentalized as a utopian goal not just by the media and Hollywood stars, but also by businesses and politicians, including the President of the United States. But in reality, the American Dream is becoming more and more like the 'Impossible Dream.' Today, many Americans believe that their odds of winning the lottery are better than attaining the American Dream.
Originally the American Dream concept was born out of lack and a genuine need for security shortly after the Great Depression and WW2. Because jobs were scarce, the greatest aspiration for most Americans was securing steady employment and owning their own home. As a result, work ethic and integrity were very strong. The focus was on a wholesome values system, family and community, all of which created pride, real prosperity and real joy. However, over time the same prosperity which resulted from being a nation of producers, also created a nation of consumers, driven not by need but rather by the desire to 'keep up with the Jones's.'
Today, the American Dream is more of a marketing concept, whereby Madison Avenue and government alike, have convinced people that they have to have a certain standard of living (such as a second home, a vacation in Europe, expensive jewelry and other 'toys') in order to be happy and fulfilled. Even the Christmas holiday has lost its original meaning and has become highly commercialized.
In other words, we've been brainwashed to believe that, 'He with the most toys lives,' rather than 'He with the most joys lives.' By taking on even higher amounts of personal debt, Americans are more stressed out and less optimistic and fulfilled then ever before despite their high standard of living. That's because 'toys' (material goods), without purpose and a wholesome values system, only produce an artificial joy that is as fleeting as it is cruel.
The American Dream as we know it, is no longer something that is born out of need and lack but rather out of greed and desire. Therefore, it does not represent the true spirit of America, which was based on perspiration, innovation, risk and reward with the focus on a wholesome values system, integrity, family, community and a strong work ethic.
From an Enron economy and huge government deficits, to our failing educational system and the break down of the family system (where kids are left home alone to grow up with their peers, gangs and TV), practically every facet of our lives is negatively effected by the pursuit of materialism, which is a by-product of the American Dream. In a materialistic-driven society where there is an obsession with fame and fortune and winning at all costs, the prevailing wisdom is to do what's politically correct, rather than doing what's in the best interest of the community. And when the intoxicating love of power overcomes the power of love, it's easy to see why absolute power corrupts absolutely.
The concept of The American Dream (as we know it now) is not only a marketing concept but it is also used by politicians for getting votes and keeping constituents happy. In the cut-throat world of politics where the stakes are high, politicians are driven by their own self-serving agendas. As such, the different political parties have their own agendas when it comes to helping certain members of society achieve the American Dream. The Democratic party on the one hand supports labor unions and union contracts that provide for big wage increases for the common worker so that they can achieve a piece of The American Dream. In so doing, they guarantee work and wages for people who are not necessarily that productive, at the expense of everyone else. On the other hand, the Republican party believes philosophically in the free enterprise system. Their vision is to have an economic system that rewards primarily people who are successful, which means mostly wealthy people, at the expense of everyone else.
In other words, both political parties and the special interest groups who contribute to their election campaigns are trying to achieve the political version of the American Dream for their constituencies at the expense of everyone else. Ironically, both political parties realize that because the pie is limited, making the American Dream a reality for all Americans is virtually impossible. As a matter of fact, most people are kept in perpetual debt their whole lives in order to maintain a standard of living consistent with the new ideal of the American Dream. It's this unattainable dream that drives both parents into the work place, working longer and harder than ever before, which contributes to the ills of society.
So in order to make the American Dream possible for as many Americans to achieve, consumerism had to be created. The point of consumerism is to get people to spend more by going into debt. The logic is that higher spending produces wealth for some people. The problem is that there is a limitation on how far people can go into debt. Eventually the economy becomes a 'house of cards' because it is unable to create 'jobs of value,'(based on producing, creating and manufacturing). Instead more and more jobs are in the services industry, catering to our insatiable need to consume. Eventually this type of faulty economy will result in financial chaos where institutions, banks and even governments fail, as we've seen by what's happening in California.
In the pursuit of pleasure and avoidance of pain, we've been looking for solutions and fulfillment in all the wrong places. The solution to restoring our economy, our failing systems and our institutions, as well as our sanity, is through the spirit. That's because whether we realize it or not, we are spiritual beings experiencing the human experience and not the other way around. As such we were meant and designed to live a life of meaning and purpose by recognizing the unity of life and living in harmony with universal laws that are characterized by integrity and the honoring of all living things. Total prosperity and peace are dependent on the strength of our spirit.
Only when the 'business as usual' type of politics is replaced by business with integrity (whereby the power of love overcomes the love of power) can we hope to see a meaningful and lasting transformation that's also cost effective. Perhaps if we live by the mantra that, 'He with the most joys lives,' rather than 'He with the most toys lives,' knowing that paradise is not so much a place but rather a state of mind, can we once again appreciate the simple pleasures in life while recognizing that indeed the best things in life are free. Now that's the real thing, unlike what Coca Cola claims to have.
And while most of us may not be Lords of the Rings, we are always the Lords of our own earthly destiny. Simply put, we all have the power to create our own destiny through personal responsibility no matter what we've been brainwashed to believe. Perhaps when we reconnect with our spiritual roots, and understand the unity of life, we can finally recognize that we are all connected in the web of life, that whatever effects one directly, effects us all indirectly (the global economy perfectly illustrates this fact). Perhaps then confrontation will give way to cooperation and destruction will be replaced with construction. Only then we will discover that peace is not so much unity in similarity but rather unity in diversity - a diversity that needs to be celebrated. Perhaps as we realize that we are all children of God, we will also learn to honor life and finally experience true and lasting peace and harmony, which inevitably leads to total prosperity for all in a win-win spirit. Now that's something to sing about.
Originally the American Dream concept was born out of lack and a genuine need for security shortly after the Great Depression and WW2. Because jobs were scarce, the greatest aspiration for most Americans was securing steady employment and owning their own home. As a result, work ethic and integrity were very strong. The focus was on a wholesome values system, family and community, all of which created pride, real prosperity and real joy. However, over time the same prosperity which resulted from being a nation of producers, also created a nation of consumers, driven not by need but rather by the desire to 'keep up with the Jones's.'
Today, the American Dream is more of a marketing concept, whereby Madison Avenue and government alike, have convinced people that they have to have a certain standard of living (such as a second home, a vacation in Europe, expensive jewelry and other 'toys') in order to be happy and fulfilled. Even the Christmas holiday has lost its original meaning and has become highly commercialized.
In other words, we've been brainwashed to believe that, 'He with the most toys lives,' rather than 'He with the most joys lives.' By taking on even higher amounts of personal debt, Americans are more stressed out and less optimistic and fulfilled then ever before despite their high standard of living. That's because 'toys' (material goods), without purpose and a wholesome values system, only produce an artificial joy that is as fleeting as it is cruel.
The American Dream as we know it, is no longer something that is born out of need and lack but rather out of greed and desire. Therefore, it does not represent the true spirit of America, which was based on perspiration, innovation, risk and reward with the focus on a wholesome values system, integrity, family, community and a strong work ethic.
From an Enron economy and huge government deficits, to our failing educational system and the break down of the family system (where kids are left home alone to grow up with their peers, gangs and TV), practically every facet of our lives is negatively effected by the pursuit of materialism, which is a by-product of the American Dream. In a materialistic-driven society where there is an obsession with fame and fortune and winning at all costs, the prevailing wisdom is to do what's politically correct, rather than doing what's in the best interest of the community. And when the intoxicating love of power overcomes the power of love, it's easy to see why absolute power corrupts absolutely.
The concept of The American Dream (as we know it now) is not only a marketing concept but it is also used by politicians for getting votes and keeping constituents happy. In the cut-throat world of politics where the stakes are high, politicians are driven by their own self-serving agendas. As such, the different political parties have their own agendas when it comes to helping certain members of society achieve the American Dream. The Democratic party on the one hand supports labor unions and union contracts that provide for big wage increases for the common worker so that they can achieve a piece of The American Dream. In so doing, they guarantee work and wages for people who are not necessarily that productive, at the expense of everyone else. On the other hand, the Republican party believes philosophically in the free enterprise system. Their vision is to have an economic system that rewards primarily people who are successful, which means mostly wealthy people, at the expense of everyone else.
In other words, both political parties and the special interest groups who contribute to their election campaigns are trying to achieve the political version of the American Dream for their constituencies at the expense of everyone else. Ironically, both political parties realize that because the pie is limited, making the American Dream a reality for all Americans is virtually impossible. As a matter of fact, most people are kept in perpetual debt their whole lives in order to maintain a standard of living consistent with the new ideal of the American Dream. It's this unattainable dream that drives both parents into the work place, working longer and harder than ever before, which contributes to the ills of society.
So in order to make the American Dream possible for as many Americans to achieve, consumerism had to be created. The point of consumerism is to get people to spend more by going into debt. The logic is that higher spending produces wealth for some people. The problem is that there is a limitation on how far people can go into debt. Eventually the economy becomes a 'house of cards' because it is unable to create 'jobs of value,'(based on producing, creating and manufacturing). Instead more and more jobs are in the services industry, catering to our insatiable need to consume. Eventually this type of faulty economy will result in financial chaos where institutions, banks and even governments fail, as we've seen by what's happening in California.
In the pursuit of pleasure and avoidance of pain, we've been looking for solutions and fulfillment in all the wrong places. The solution to restoring our economy, our failing systems and our institutions, as well as our sanity, is through the spirit. That's because whether we realize it or not, we are spiritual beings experiencing the human experience and not the other way around. As such we were meant and designed to live a life of meaning and purpose by recognizing the unity of life and living in harmony with universal laws that are characterized by integrity and the honoring of all living things. Total prosperity and peace are dependent on the strength of our spirit.
Only when the 'business as usual' type of politics is replaced by business with integrity (whereby the power of love overcomes the love of power) can we hope to see a meaningful and lasting transformation that's also cost effective. Perhaps if we live by the mantra that, 'He with the most joys lives,' rather than 'He with the most toys lives,' knowing that paradise is not so much a place but rather a state of mind, can we once again appreciate the simple pleasures in life while recognizing that indeed the best things in life are free. Now that's the real thing, unlike what Coca Cola claims to have.
And while most of us may not be Lords of the Rings, we are always the Lords of our own earthly destiny. Simply put, we all have the power to create our own destiny through personal responsibility no matter what we've been brainwashed to believe. Perhaps when we reconnect with our spiritual roots, and understand the unity of life, we can finally recognize that we are all connected in the web of life, that whatever effects one directly, effects us all indirectly (the global economy perfectly illustrates this fact). Perhaps then confrontation will give way to cooperation and destruction will be replaced with construction. Only then we will discover that peace is not so much unity in similarity but rather unity in diversity - a diversity that needs to be celebrated. Perhaps as we realize that we are all children of God, we will also learn to honor life and finally experience true and lasting peace and harmony, which inevitably leads to total prosperity for all in a win-win spirit. Now that's something to sing about.
How Does Religion Affect America's Economy and Politics
Introduction
Religion is a persons believe or faith, regarding to the existence and divinity of God or gods. There are several different religions practiced in the Unites States of which the majority consists of Christians, with a minority of Jews, Buddhists, Atheists and Muslims.
How is Politics Affected
According to the first amendments of the U.S constitution, the establishment of religion by the government is restricted and it also constitutes religious freedom for practices and rituals. The reason for that is basically the issue of human rights, and the freedom and democracy that America is proud of.
The question is that how does religion which is completely separate from the government and politics affect the way of politics as well as the economy?
In America the people are the ones that supposedly control the fate of the country, and they are the ones that elect the government and it has been seen for the past two elections that the Republicans who support the interests of the religious individuals and cater to the needs of the people who think that practices such as gay marriage and abortion should be abolished. It has been argued that these are the factors that are the reasons for election and re-election of the republican candidates. The first and most crucial political effect that can be said to be related to religion is the selection of the government that runs America.
Effects on Economy
Secondly religious issues such as the abolition of abortion and the local laws such as the prohibition of selling alcoholic beverages on Sundays which are "religious" days effects the economy on the micro level by decreasing the amount of business that people make, definitely the sales of a bar will be decreased if it is prohibited to sell its products on one day out of seven.
On the other hand religious issues can be a cause of protest which might cost the government especially if the time of the government officials is taken as a valued entity, as at least for the time being the attention of the officials will be diverted to solving that issue. Also religious factors and issues might need amendments to the constitution, which might affect the economy of the country on the Marco level.
This might also be viewed in a positive ways as some issues might contribute to the economy.
Conclusion
Every body has some beliefs and all follow a certain religion, if Atheism is also considered a religion, people make the country and thus the behavior of people need to be catered at least in a democratic country such as America. This could be used as positive which might be called "politics", but this does not mean religious issues cannot damage the country as a whole. In conclusion religion and politics cannot be separated.
Religion is a persons believe or faith, regarding to the existence and divinity of God or gods. There are several different religions practiced in the Unites States of which the majority consists of Christians, with a minority of Jews, Buddhists, Atheists and Muslims.
How is Politics Affected
According to the first amendments of the U.S constitution, the establishment of religion by the government is restricted and it also constitutes religious freedom for practices and rituals. The reason for that is basically the issue of human rights, and the freedom and democracy that America is proud of.
The question is that how does religion which is completely separate from the government and politics affect the way of politics as well as the economy?
In America the people are the ones that supposedly control the fate of the country, and they are the ones that elect the government and it has been seen for the past two elections that the Republicans who support the interests of the religious individuals and cater to the needs of the people who think that practices such as gay marriage and abortion should be abolished. It has been argued that these are the factors that are the reasons for election and re-election of the republican candidates. The first and most crucial political effect that can be said to be related to religion is the selection of the government that runs America.
Effects on Economy
Secondly religious issues such as the abolition of abortion and the local laws such as the prohibition of selling alcoholic beverages on Sundays which are "religious" days effects the economy on the micro level by decreasing the amount of business that people make, definitely the sales of a bar will be decreased if it is prohibited to sell its products on one day out of seven.
On the other hand religious issues can be a cause of protest which might cost the government especially if the time of the government officials is taken as a valued entity, as at least for the time being the attention of the officials will be diverted to solving that issue. Also religious factors and issues might need amendments to the constitution, which might affect the economy of the country on the Marco level.
This might also be viewed in a positive ways as some issues might contribute to the economy.
Conclusion
Every body has some beliefs and all follow a certain religion, if Atheism is also considered a religion, people make the country and thus the behavior of people need to be catered at least in a democratic country such as America. This could be used as positive which might be called "politics", but this does not mean religious issues cannot damage the country as a whole. In conclusion religion and politics cannot be separated.
1001 Events That Made America: A Patriot's Handbook (A Book Review)
A very close connection exists between history and chronology, since chronology explains the events that have taken place as the result of what happened earlier. We may know many well-documented accounts of history; however, if these accounts were not given to us in a chronological order, but in a scattered way, we would surely miss the reasons behind those events. A failure to correlate the history of the United States with its chronology by us Americans or by the other nations has resulted in the misunderstanding of the principles that we hold dear as a nation. Our ability to defend the truth of the United States depends upon our knowledge of its existence. Many attempts have been made at noting down the chronology of events here and there, especially in the yearly almanacs a few companies publish; however, they have come short of giving their readers a full historical perspective. Most of those accounts center on the so-called significant events. Since what is significant can be a subjective choice by non-historians, a nation's true past can only be determined through its chronology and on events whose facts all historians agree upon. 1001 Events That Made America by Alan Axelrod fills this gap by providing the readers with the exact evolution of this country, starting from 40,000 BC and ending in 2005 with the disaster hurricane Katrina caused. The author calls this book a patriot's handbook, which is a brilliant way of looking at our history and the way we like to exist. In the introduction of the book, the author claims that the events he has chosen represent the consensus by other historians on what is important to us as a nation. In the author's words, "the bare bones timeline" is not enough and the one thousand and one events a reader should know about America will bring him closer to this country. I read quite a bit of history; however, what little I know is scattered. In school, we were told the reason the colonists broke away from England was because of the tax put on the tea imports, which had seemed rather a flimsy excuse to me. In this book, looking at the well-chosen yet concisely-explained events in chronological order gave me a better understanding of how Northern America's distant past tied to our country and how our country developed a different character from its mother country to bring about the separation. The author, Alan Axelrod, PH. D., resides in Atlanta, Georgia, and has written two best-sellers. "Patton on Leadership" and "Elizabeth One, CEO." The author's other books are: "The Complete Idiot's Guide to American History," " Nothing to Fear: Lessons in Leadership from FDR," "Office Superman," "Chronicle of the Indian Wars: From Colonial Times to Wounded Knee," "America's Wars," "Ace Your Midterms & Finals: U.S. History," "Profiles in Audacity: Great Decisions and How They Were Made," "What Every American Should Know about American History: 200 Events That Shaped the Nation,""When the Buck Stops with You: Harry S. Truman on Leadership," "Everything I Know about Business I Learned from Monopoly: Successful Executives Reveal Strategic Lessons from the Worlds Greatest Board Game." Alan Axelrod has also collaborated with other authors on various history books. "1001 Events That Made America: A Patriot's Handbook" ISBN: 978-0-7922-5307-5 is printed in hardback with 287 pages, containing an introduction and a comprehensive index. This small book, as a gift, will delight anyone and will make an enlightening edition to any library as a reference books.
Survey Shows Americans Not As Polarized As Politicians And Newscasters
A new survey by Whew! Research reveals that Americans are not as polarized as politicians and newscasters on supposedly divisive issues like abortion, gay marriage and stem cell research.
"Despite talk of 'culture wars' and the high visibility of politicians, newscasters, and activist groups on both sides of the cultural divide, there has been no polarization of the general public into liberal and conservative camps.”
That’s what Whew! Research learned in its latest poll of slightly over 2,000 American adults. Even more astonishing to politicos and airwave heads, the survey illustrated a winning willingness of Americans to consider opposing points of view, with two-thirds of the respondents supporting a middle ground in regard to abortion rights. Even more incredible to those who would divide and sell us political candidates or talk shows, a majority of those who advocated such moderation represented such diverse groups as evangelicals, Catholics, Republicans and Democrats.
On five prominent social issues – abortion rights, stem cell research, gay marriage, adoption of children by gay couples, and availability of the "morning-after" pill – only 12% took the conservative position on all issues and 22 % took the opposite position on all the issues. But – imagine, despite how much we’ve been indoctrinated to believe differently – the majority expressed mixed opinions.
And just to add insult to injury to the politicians and other controversialists, the survey showed that 56% of Americans favor stem cell research, even though human embryos will be destroyed, while 32% oppose it.
And just so you know that these refreshing pluralistic findings are here to stay, here’s one fact that proves they’re based on an unassailably solid foundation. The poll revealed that 57% of the respondents had heard little or nothing about the stem cell debate. So this inviting openness is based on a mental condition that has proved to be particularly intractable: pure ignorance
"Despite talk of 'culture wars' and the high visibility of politicians, newscasters, and activist groups on both sides of the cultural divide, there has been no polarization of the general public into liberal and conservative camps.”
That’s what Whew! Research learned in its latest poll of slightly over 2,000 American adults. Even more astonishing to politicos and airwave heads, the survey illustrated a winning willingness of Americans to consider opposing points of view, with two-thirds of the respondents supporting a middle ground in regard to abortion rights. Even more incredible to those who would divide and sell us political candidates or talk shows, a majority of those who advocated such moderation represented such diverse groups as evangelicals, Catholics, Republicans and Democrats.
On five prominent social issues – abortion rights, stem cell research, gay marriage, adoption of children by gay couples, and availability of the "morning-after" pill – only 12% took the conservative position on all issues and 22 % took the opposite position on all the issues. But – imagine, despite how much we’ve been indoctrinated to believe differently – the majority expressed mixed opinions.
And just to add insult to injury to the politicians and other controversialists, the survey showed that 56% of Americans favor stem cell research, even though human embryos will be destroyed, while 32% oppose it.
And just so you know that these refreshing pluralistic findings are here to stay, here’s one fact that proves they’re based on an unassailably solid foundation. The poll revealed that 57% of the respondents had heard little or nothing about the stem cell debate. So this inviting openness is based on a mental condition that has proved to be particularly intractable: pure ignorance
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)