John in PA

There is Only One Law of The Land

Revisado: 06-17-17

While Democrats and Progressives seek to subvert the law of the land for their own purposes, it only makes sense that they also will typically embrace notions of duality in Law such as the allowance of Sharia Law. Only those who wage a war against women would embrace the various non-unified Sharia. In almost all of its various forms, it oppresses women and severely limits their rights relative to that of men.
Jay Sekulow assists us in better understanding the subversion of American Law and how this appearance of collusion is very much a parallelism in ideologies rather than an outright collusion. Still. collusion against Western Law is the agenda.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 2 personas

A sound Branding of the Left: A Hate Group

Revisado: 06-17-17

Mr. Sekulow makes a fair and sound accounting of the duplicity in the Left - i.e. democrats and socialists. It is no longer a party of democracy where law is the rule, but rather a party of Bureaucracy with rules that they apply like a 5th grader playing soccer. If the rule is in their favor they advance it using hate and fear against opposing view points. If it is not in their favor, they subvert the law (rule) and violate their own principles to advance their message of hate against anything not in their favor.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Excellent Collection Of Examples

Revisado: 06-13-17

You might need to take breaks from the content because the duplicitous acts of the left eat at your heart of liberty, justice, and freedom.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Not prose - Just a glossary

Revisado: 07-18-14

Would you try another book from The Wisdom Series and/or Rick Adamson?

No

What was most disappointing about The Wisdom Series’s story?

The overview states that Marx has had the greatest impact and " whose work incited far-reaching social and economic change." And... "Accompanied by an insightful introductory essay that puts the included excerpts from his works in context," However, this is simply a glossary of terms beginning at the 3 minute and 17 second time stamp. The intro does not put anything into context and worse, it does not express the failures of the theory or any of the contested points of view. Therefore, this work has no relevancy to today. It only has relevancy to a failed theory.

Have you listened to any of Rick Adamson’s other performances before? How does this one compare?

??

You didn’t love this book... but did it have any redeeming qualities?

A written glossary would have been far more valuable! Why record a glossary of terms?

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Circular and ideological

Revisado: 07-18-14

Would you try another book from Ronald Dworkin and/or Michael Kramer?

No!

What was most disappointing about Ronald Dworkin’s story?

No clear argument. So ideological that he can't even see that it is ideological. Dworkin takes it for granted that his perspective is correct simply because it is his. He does not seek arguments against his position and therefore makes no sound argument FOR his position. Considering he titled the book with a question, one expects a deliberated, clear and supported argument. I can't find it without extreme efforts toward bypassing his ideology to get to the meat.

Who would you have cast as narrator instead of Michael Kramer?

Mr. Kramer did a good narration EXCEPT for way too much hissing on his "s" sounds. For those who are affected by such white noise the way I am, he just puts you to sleep.

What character would you cut from Is Democracy Possible Here??

Mr. Dworkin

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Endless and Unstructured

Revisado: 07-18-14

What disappointed you about Song of the Sun?

No chapter or section breaks. Audio only! No text available to aid in establishing structure or organizing content. No way to interrelate content.

Would you ever listen to anything by Andrew Harvey again?

Absolutely not!

How did the narrator detract from the book?

In defense to the narrator - it is a good effort at being calming and serene. However, the style, while appropriate for the content, is not appropriate for all of the content TOGETHER. A wise person would have designated 2 narrators to establish some change-up and reduce monotony. But again, this is not on the narrator. This is the producer and writer's responsibility to see the work through to a good end product.

You didn’t love this book... but did it have any redeeming qualities?

NONE - good content is not retrievable. It lacks structure to make what could be otherwise retrievable into useable content. Unredeemable!

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 2 personas

Unbalanced panoramic of conservatism - No Buckley

Revisado: 07-18-14

This book wasn’t for you, but who do you think might enjoy it more?

Only Liberals, Progressives and Leftists that are intellectually dishonest idealogues who demonstrate that they are incapable of tolerating diversity would like this book.

What could Carl T. Bogus have done to make this a more enjoyable book for you?

Instead of lampooning Buckley with ideological bias he could have stated the case from Buckley's side and then stated the case from his own bias view; and with that he could have showed how he was right. As it stands however, Mr. Bogus is simply advancing unsound ideology against a well respected man who has sadly passed. The content will only aid those on the left who want to follow as mind-numb robots regurgitating unsupported ideologic rhetoric.

Would you be willing to try another one of Mark Ashby’s performances?

No comment.

What character would you cut from Buckley?

Mr. Bogus

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 3 personas

Islam Apologist - Unsound Argumentation

Revisado: 07-18-14

What disappointed you about No god but God?

Reza writes of Islam the way good people want it to be exercised and applied. No problem there! But he states the aspects of historic Islam - of which radicals use to advance violence - only to arrive at a pathetic attempt to dismiss those historical aspects by means of unsupported and unsound reinterpretation. While the approach is likely welcomed by those who wish to see ONLY good, the approach does absolutely nothing to reduce or weaken the arguments made by violent radicals. Violent radicals get to maintain their credibility by maintaining their historical arguments. Reza is simply expressing a DESIRED interpretation of Islam. He does nothing to weaken the radical arguments, and, therefore, he is simply cloaking the historical Islam as a wholly peaceful religion WHILE providing those violent radicals cover form the open exposure that they deserve.

Would you ever listen to anything by Reza Aslan again?

No.

How did the narrator detract from the book?

No comment.

What character would you cut from No god but God?

Strawman arguments - which requires deletion of far more than half the content.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 4 personas