Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A Patriot's History of the United States . . . Finally, On Sale Today!
Penguin/Sentinel and Amazon.com ^ | 12/29/04 | LS

Posted on 12/29/2004 5:39:25 AM PST by LS

Edited on 12/29/2004 8:20:02 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-133 next last
To: NautiNurse

Heheheh. We had to cut something like 20,000 words just a month before it went to print. There is something magical about the $29.00 price tag, according to the sales specialists.


51 posted on 12/29/2004 8:20:40 AM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: MEG33

See post 47


52 posted on 12/29/2004 8:21:07 AM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: xsmommy

See post 47


53 posted on 12/29/2004 8:21:47 AM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: LS

Congratulations!

Now if I can get off of my duff and finish mine...[g]


54 posted on 12/29/2004 8:21:51 AM PST by mhking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mhking
What is yours about?

I got to talk to Wm. F. Buckley once, and I asked him how he wrote so much (back then, several articles a week for NR, plus his novels), and he said, I get up, brush my teeth, and sit down and write. There is no magical thing about it.

55 posted on 12/29/2004 8:23:01 AM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Bump!


56 posted on 12/29/2004 8:23:24 AM PST by windchime (Won't it be great watching President Bush spend political capital?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: LS
Johnson's "History of the American People" is the best book (next to ours) out there, but he has some big flaws that we hoped to fix.

I've always heard this book to be very highly recommended by American history buffs. What flaws does he have in his book?

57 posted on 12/29/2004 8:24:24 AM PST by Future Snake Eater ("Stupid grandma leaver-outers!"--Tom Servo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: LS

cool! i am seriously thinking of having xsteen take it in to show her 10th grade history teacher, and her english teacher, both of whom are conservatives. she attends a private Catholic allgirls school in DC. what i really need to do is get it in the hands of her 9th grade World History teacher who was a raving lib.


58 posted on 12/29/2004 8:25:32 AM PST by xsmommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: LS
What is yours about?

I'm going to take my writings (blatherings, bleatings, belchings, or whatever you might refer to them today as) and collate them, along with some additional expository material relating to conservatism in general and black conservatism in particular.

The tenative title is "Ramblings of a Black Conservative," although that may end up just being some sort of subtitle once it's all said and done.

59 posted on 12/29/2004 8:26:42 AM PST by mhking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Future Snake Eater
A lot---mostly little. He gets names, dates wrong. My biggest problem with his interpretations deals with economic issues. He still blames the Great Crash on "overspeculation," despite a lot of economic evidence to the contrary. He doesn't tell a very consistent economic story, if you will, beginning with the 1830s, where he misses the Bank War.

I think he misses the real significance of the 1950s; and, of course, stops sooner than we do.

60 posted on 12/29/2004 8:27:07 AM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: xsmommy

By all means.


61 posted on 12/29/2004 8:27:46 AM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: LS
and he said, I get up, brush my teeth, and sit down and write. There is no magical thing about it.

I've got to agree; that sounds like some of the best advice I can think of...then again, my wife (She Who Must Be Obeyed) insists that I'm the monarch of procrastination, too...

62 posted on 12/29/2004 8:27:54 AM PST by mhking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: mhking

Sounds reasonable.


63 posted on 12/29/2004 8:28:05 AM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: LS
Congratulations on the Spooner Award..
I just ran across this thread on a former Spooner winner..

Why Care What The Constitution Says?
Address:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1115106/posts?page=47

Any comments?

And do you have any links to longer reviews of your new book?
64 posted on 12/29/2004 8:29:18 AM PST by jonestown ( Tolerance for intolerance is not tolerance at all. Jonestown, TX)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LS

Added to my wish list, sir! Looking forward to reading it!


65 posted on 12/29/2004 8:31:32 AM PST by Future Snake Eater ("Stupid grandma leaver-outers!"--Tom Servo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LS
I think he misses the real significance of the 1950s; and, of course, stops sooner than we do.

Do you find it difficult to detach yourself from such current history as the War on Terror for analytical purposes?

66 posted on 12/29/2004 8:34:44 AM PST by Future Snake Eater ("Stupid grandma leaver-outers!"--Tom Servo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: LS

I certainly do and I will.


67 posted on 12/29/2004 8:39:04 AM PST by Bahbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: LS

Thanks,
I may have to go to Amazon, but sometimes I'll pay alittle extra to have it now. From the description it sounds like the type of book I've been looking for. I've got two teenagers being fed the revisionist pablum from their teachers at school. I try to counteract with my limited knowledge and some old (prior to 1930) history book. Your book sounds very interesting and I believe will help me.

May take you u p on the autograph.
Thanks,
Bob E.


68 posted on 12/29/2004 8:50:46 AM PST by suijuris
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Thanks for the ping
bttt


69 posted on 12/29/2004 9:04:43 AM PST by firewalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Yet another "thanks for the ping"!, Howlin

I was just sitting down to try to find this very book, when I just had to take one more peek at FR for new pings.
Et voila! you gave me the answer.

Who says FR is not the most valuable site on the internet!!!


70 posted on 12/29/2004 9:08:17 AM PST by maica (I give thanks for all brave Americans who bring hope of freedom to people around the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: LS

BUMP


71 posted on 12/29/2004 9:11:22 AM PST by kitkat (Merry CHRISTmas, everyone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LS

Cool! I'll have to get a copy to balance Alan Brinkley's Amer. History book that we used for my homeschooled daughter. I only used it because we had it left from our older sons' high school years. She even noticed the liberal bias in Brinkley's book, though to his credit, he did have a page in each chapter devoted to 'alternate views', though it certainly didn't balance the bias in the rest of it!


72 posted on 12/29/2004 9:15:13 AM PST by SuziQ (It's the most wonderful time of the year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LS

Congratulations, and thanks for writing this needed book. Two copies ordered for curious, sincere nephews who get their 'news' from NPR.


73 posted on 12/29/2004 9:25:59 AM PST by maica (I give thanks for all brave Americans who bring hope of freedom to people around the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jonestown
I disagree with his take on "the consent of the governed." It undermines his whole thesis, because it was precisely that "consent" that the Revolutionaries thought they were not given---nor even asked for. The entire premise of the Constitution is based on a framework that the laws are derived only by the "consent of the governed." Now, of course NO ONE thought that meant "all the governed," or even (usually) a majority of the governed, but if you go to the origins of the Constitution, namely the drafts of the colonial charters, many of the governors, although they ruled at the appointment of the king, nevertheless were viewed as PURELY serving at the consent of the governed. The Plymouth covenant says so pretty explicitly, since most of these were COMPANIES and the "voters" were really "stockholders."

It is important to realize that the foundations for "consent" at all originated in medieval times as a result of a feudal arrangement between king and vassal, and this arrangement rested almost entirely on the bequeathing of LAND and a TITLE, for which the knights promised service. They did not have a vote, but their first right wa to property, and since then, property has been the foundational right of all the others---even some of the "Natural Rights" theorists saw the human person as "one's own property."

I do agree that the Constitution has become whatever a circuit court in CA wants it to be, and that needs to be reversed.

74 posted on 12/29/2004 9:33:42 AM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Future Snake Eater
Not really. I am of the view that while no historian can escape biases, one should neither pretend they do not exist (the "empiricists") or seek to counterbalance them with antithetical concepts (the New Left).

If you look at my previous book, "The Entrepreneurial Adventure," published in 2000, I went through 1996 or 1997 and (so far) my assessment of what was happening at the time I wrote it does not appear to be too far off.

75 posted on 12/29/2004 9:36:13 AM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: SuziQ

It's funny that in many of the endnotes, especially on Jackson, the Roaring 20s and Great Depression, Reagan, and Clinton, we cite many sentences from more than a dozen current textbooks precisely to illustrate bias. Often, they say almost the same thing (as with Reagan).


76 posted on 12/29/2004 9:37:56 AM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: LS

Thank you for writing this. I have a 3 yr. old boy that I fret about being spoon fed revisionist garbage. I'll enjoy it and then wait to pass it down to him.


77 posted on 12/29/2004 10:08:41 AM PST by MattinNJ (Only Arnold would have the stones to say Nixon was the reason he was a Republican.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LS
Great, more reading, just what I need ;o)

Seriously, this looks like it's going to be well worth reading.

78 posted on 12/29/2004 10:08:51 AM PST by McGavin999 (Senate is trying to cover their A$$es with Rumsfeld's hide)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LS

I just ordered your book from Amazon. I want this book no matter what, but I have a question for you. I have a 13-year-old grandson who is currently a prisoner of public education. Will your book be right for his age group?

And, importantly, thanks for writing this much-needed book.


79 posted on 12/29/2004 10:16:24 AM PST by kitkat (Merry CHRISTmas, everyone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Thanks for the ping, Howlin.


80 posted on 12/29/2004 10:31:12 AM PST by kitkat (Merry CHRISTmas, everyone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kitkat
Honestly, it's probably above a 13-year old. I'd say a 16-year old with good language skills. We originally conceived this as a "text" book but realized that it would never get by the various faculty committees, and moreover, we learned that a "text" book cannot even GET IN A BOOKSTORE! My book, "The Entrepreurial Adventure" (2000) cannot get into Barnes and Noble or Borders. So we took the "trade" route with this one, and I'm glad we did.

Just tell your 13-year-old to hang on for a couple of years :)

81 posted on 12/29/2004 10:40:58 AM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: LS
Congratulations on the Spooner Award..
I just ran across this thread on a former Spooner winner..

Why Care What The Constitution Says?
Address:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1115106/posts?page=47

Any comments?
64 jones





I disagree with his take on "the consent of the governed." It undermines his whole thesis, because it was precisely that "consent" that the Revolutionaries thought they were not given---nor even asked for.

The entire premise of the Constitution is based on a framework that the laws are derived only by the "consent of the governed."

Now, of course NO ONE thought that meant "all the governed," or even (usually) a majority of the governed, but if you go to the origins of the Constitution, namely the drafts of the colonial charters, many of the governors, although they ruled at the appointment of the king, nevertheless were viewed as PURELY serving at the consent of the governed. The Plymouth covenant says so pretty explicitly, since most of these were COMPANIES and the "voters" were really "stockholders."

It is important to realize that the foundations for "consent" at all originated in medieval times as a result of a feudal arrangement between king and vassal, and this arrangement rested almost entirely on the bequeathing of LAND and a TITLE, for which the knights promised service. They did not have a vote, but their first right wa to property, and since then, property has been the foundational right of all the others---even some of the "Natural Rights" theorists saw the human person as "one's own property."

I do agree that the Constitution has become whatever a circuit court in CA wants it to be, and that needs to be reversed.
74 LS






Barnett claims:
"I explain why the most commonly held view of constitutional legitimacy -- the "consent of the governed" -- is wrong because it is a standard that no constitution can meet."

I fail to see, given the basic simplicity of our Constitutions principles, why the ordinary person, [at some point prior to being given the privilege to vote], could not give his 'consent', an oath, -- to honor & support the Constitution.
[ the oath required for naturalized citizens would be an obvious model]

Do you touch on these subjects in your new book?

Any possibility that you could post an except, [like Bartletts] from your introduction?
82 posted on 12/29/2004 12:32:24 PM PST by jonestown ( Tolerance for intolerance is not tolerance at all. Jonestown, TX)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: LS

What is your approach on Lincoln and the North.....positive or negative mostly?

Looks like a good book. I am looking forward to reading it.


83 posted on 12/29/2004 12:42:08 PM PST by rwfromkansas ("War is an ugly thing, but...the decayed feeling...which thinks nothing worth war, is worse." -Mill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: LS

H-Conserv/Conservativenet sure is quiet. Jensen seems to be the only one who ever writes anything.

That is what it looked like from the archives anyway. I see one of the guys is from Emporia. That is one school on my list for getting a master's in history if I do indeed decide for certain I want to go this route instead of journalism.


84 posted on 12/29/2004 12:59:36 PM PST by rwfromkansas ("War is an ugly thing, but...the decayed feeling...which thinks nothing worth war, is worse." -Mill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: LS

BTW, tell the publisher to allow the "look inside this book" feature.

Just looking at the table of contents and getting to read 4 pages or so does wonders. It makes me feel like I am in a real bookstore when at Amazon.

I bet it would help with sales, even though I am just going to get it without that feature myself since I know it has to be good. But, for non-freeper readers, I bet that would be a big help.


85 posted on 12/29/2004 1:06:19 PM PST by rwfromkansas ("War is an ugly thing, but...the decayed feeling...which thinks nothing worth war, is worse." -Mill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LS

What caused the crash in your opinion?


86 posted on 12/29/2004 1:08:29 PM PST by rwfromkansas ("War is an ugly thing, but...the decayed feeling...which thinks nothing worth war, is worse." -Mill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: jonestown
I think you can go on-line at Amazon and it has selected pp.

I don't think I want to get into a cross-posting match with particular sections of our book, though.

87 posted on 12/29/2004 1:40:35 PM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas
Unlike Thomas DiLorenzo, I'm a Lincolnophile. We see the CW as entirely slavery driven (interestingly, I just started a new academic project with two economists, one from COlumbia and one from Tulane, on slave price data that we think will really nail down the fact that it was slavery, and not tariffs or "clash of cultures" that was driving secession).

We agree with Higgs and Hummell that the CW caused a vast new expansion of the federal bureaucracy, much of it a-constitutional, but in the long run see that as being the only way to solve the problem that the Republic had punted on three times already.

88 posted on 12/29/2004 1:42:55 PM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas

I thought they had this feature already. Sometimes it takes Amazon a while to get that feature up and running on a new book.


89 posted on 12/29/2004 1:43:48 PM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas
The Smoot-Hawley tariff jolted an already weakening market. No question there was a lot of margin lending going on, but the key exogenous shock was the passage through Congressional committees of S-H, which threatened to jack up prices on domestic goods anywhere from 5% to 30%. With items like cars, for example, this meant a tremendous hit to sales. (Subsequent economists have argued that S-H was never properly "valued" because economists did not take into account the deflation by the Fed, and that S-H's real impact was about 5% of GNP---a phenomenal amount, and an amount large enough by itself to cause the Depression.)

The Fed screwed things up, too, by constricting the money supply, and the nation saw its gold flowing out because we---but only the U.S.---were still on the gold standard. It was a perfect storm of bad policies.

90 posted on 12/29/2004 1:46:52 PM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: LS

Congratulations!
I just ordered the book from Amazon.

Would you be kind enough to autograph it for me?


91 posted on 12/29/2004 2:16:07 PM PST by rohry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LS

Thanks for your answer. My grandson has a present coming for his 16th birthday.


92 posted on 12/29/2004 2:21:41 PM PST by kitkat (Merry CHRISTmas, everyone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: LS

I tend to be much more southern sympathetic, but that project looks very interesting...


93 posted on 12/29/2004 2:49:36 PM PST by rwfromkansas ("War is an ugly thing, but...the decayed feeling...which thinks nothing worth war, is worse." -Mill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: rohry

Yeah, see the line at the bottom of the post.


94 posted on 12/29/2004 3:07:48 PM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas

I think you'll find the overall treatment fair, but we do take on the "neo-Confederates" as well as the Marxists in their interpretations of the CW. Still, the book is worth it if only for the New Deal and the Reagan years. Heck, my treatment of Woodstock alone is worth the $29! Hehehe.


95 posted on 12/29/2004 3:09:54 PM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: LS; Jen; Squantos; MeeknMing; TEXASPROUD; IncPen; Calpernia; ThinkDifferent; Poohbah; Balata; ...
I'd like to ping this out to all my FRiends. LS is a FReeper of the first order and we all need to support his efforts. I have not read the book yet but am anxious to do so - I suspect it defends our core beliefs. If you would wish a signed copy, please contact LS by FReepmail.

Lando

96 posted on 12/29/2004 6:43:55 PM PST by Lando Lincoln (GWB - history will be very kind to you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lando Lincoln; LS

97 posted on 12/29/2004 6:49:20 PM PST by MeekOneGOP (There is only one GOOD 'RAT: one that has been voted OUT of POWER !! Straight ticket GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Lando Lincoln

Thanks for the ping LL !

Merry New Year !


98 posted on 12/29/2004 7:27:13 PM PST by Squantos (Be polite. Be professional. But, have a plan to kill everyone you meet. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: LS

Bump!


99 posted on 12/29/2004 10:14:26 PM PST by bad company (a conservative bases his politics on his morals,a lib bases his morals on his politics)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lando Lincoln

bttt


100 posted on 12/29/2004 11:16:20 PM PST by lainde
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-133 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson