Reviews for Reclaiming Liberty

The average rating for Reclaiming Liberty based on 2 reviews is 4 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2017-05-19 00:00:00 Marie Davis Reclaiming Liberty by James Ronald Kennedy describes the issues in the country which have created so many problems for our fellow-citizens over the past century. Moreover, the book attempts to create solutions for our current difficulties. It does a very good job at detailing both our problems and Mr. Kennedy's solutions. This books is well-written and insightful. However, Dr. Ron Paul wrote three shorter books (The Revolution: A Manifesto; End the Fed; and Liberty Defined) which describe each of the issues Kennedy brings up in a much more concise manner. For that reason, I have to give Mr. Kennedy's book 3 out of 5 stars. If you've already picked up those three books, this one is unnecessary. However, if you have not and want to read Reclaiming Liberty, I recommend it.

Review # 2 was written on 2015-08-30 00:00:00 Robin J Mikels So there's being offensive to make a point (Chris Rock's "N's v. Black People" sketches). There's being offensive to be funny. (South Park's Trapped in the Closet episode, which will probably send me to hell but I can't stop laughing at it.) And there's being offensive just to be offensive. Sadly, this book is the last kind--so much so that I want to hang a disclaimer of "I'M NOT WITH HIM" over anywhere this book appears on my profile. The only reason I made it through the whole thing is that once I start a book, I always finish it; I've never given up on anything once I've started, although I almost threw this one down several times. I have no problem with pointing out areas where you disagree with someone, but Mr. Savage refers to public figures as "Coffee Cup Annan," "Madeline Halfbright," and "Mayor Any Twosome-Noosem." I thought that it stopped being acceptable to use people's names to makes fun of them in junior high. Or, another gem, any Muslim country is referred to in his book by the generic label "Krapistan," defined in his glossary as "any Turd-World dustbowl still stuck in the Middle Ages." The list goes on, with Mr. Savage insulting both his opponents and his supporters alike using playground language. His tendency to refer to "spokeschick" and "newschick," for example, or to say to people who agree with him that they're too stupid to know what he's talking about. No, literally, it's in there. This is how you talk to your allies? Really? We move on from, past badly drawn stereotype into examples of his "ignnerce." (Those from the South will know that being "ignorant" means you don't know something, and being "ignnert" means you're stupid, racist and/or sexist on purpose.) Mr. Savage displays the type of rabid attack-dog mentality that makes it embarrassing to say that you're conservative; even when I agree with his basic points, I was disgusted by the way he expressed them, especially since he couldn't seem to resist taking back-handed digs at his supports as well. His refusal to acknowledge actual facts (from other conservative sources, no less, not solely from the "Taliban News Network") if they don't fit his ideas of "Hitlers in dirty nightshirts" or "Headcutters in Headscarfs." Really? You expect to win converts by calling us sheeple, and saying we don't "know the difference between Mussolini, Tortellini, or Linguine." Unfortunately, after you wade through Mr. Savage's hatemongering and offensiveness for the sake of offensiveness (which he despises in other people, but seems to find perfectly acceptable in himself), you can't find any actual substance to his arguments. If you want actual, substantive conservative arguments that you can use for ammunition in debates, or even to bolster your own beliefs, try Dinesh D'Souza, Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter (who knows how to be offensive to make a point or be fun, and then stop there). Try just about anyone else; just don't let this be your only face of conservative talk radio.