First let me state that I am a died in the wool republican. I think Ronald Regan walked on water and both Bush's got a bum deal. However, this book is too slanted even for me. The book not only totally disregards the liberal perspective (which I generally have no problem with) it's full of historical errors. I'm not a history major and even I caught a couple of glaring errors with some of the events of WWII.
Another problem I have with the book is that it seems to gloss over events that I would have liked to hear more details on. I suppose that has to be the case, given the extreme breadth of time this book is trying to encapsulate.
Overall, it's not awful and it is nice to hear from the other side of the fence for a change, but it's not anything I'll listen to again.
This book had some good facts and gave me a feeling for some of the things that were happening. But there was a great lack of good quotes or stories about the characters. The author obviously has biases about each of our presidents and these come out and are not balanced at all by contrary facts.
an overarching criticism is that the book fails to take into account philosophical trends which were occurring in Europe and other nations at the time when the events were occurring in the United States. For example, the eight or so other civil wars which were occurring all over the globe with parallel issues at the time of ours.
But I ask, what about this book inspires me to be a patriot? Can anyone tell me?
I love history and read many historical books, this is very inaccurate account. For example this book states, the results from CCC and WPA are negligible the work ended in 1948. The funny thing is, within 50 miles of the small town where I live are 20 examples of the work from the CCC and WPA and they still being used. It is a slap in the face of all who worked so hard to do such good work, still being used 60 years later. I am neither a Republican or a Democrat, but if you want to write a bias book state it up front. This book's only redeeming feature is it does give insight on how two Republicans view history. I called it the OMG book because, no a chapter went by that I found to be very misleading. If you are a Republican you will love it. If you are in to accurate histories, a Democrate, or do not like politics you will hate it.
The content should be very interesting to me, but the narration sucked so bad that it became an instant snoozer for me every time I tried to listen.....
Awful narration. Listen to the sample before buying. I've put up with his high school style reading for 9 hours already and I just can't take it anymore. There's NO way I can listen to another 41 hours of it. A shame really...it seems well written. If you have the time and inclination to read the physical book, choose that over the audio version.
Was suggested to me by audible after I bought a few libertarian titles. This book is NOT libertarian, it is an evangelistic look at American history. Republicans might like this, I did not.
Well written and I have to agree with reviewer that authors did their best keeping it pretty unbiased. My problem was with the reader's mispronounciation of many words and names of places. I used to rent books from Recorded Books. One of their readers, Mike Hammer, made it a point to find out how to pronounce names and places he wasn't sure of. I know this may sound petty, but readers are supposed to be professional and if that means doing a little research, do it.
Excellent book, and well read. Anytime the left is inflamed, as a few of these reviewers clearly are, you have something very near to truth. It is refreshing to listen to something bias free. Buy this book and learn the truth about your country.
I am changing my rating from 5 stars to one star after reading the last chapters. I need to say that I utterly enjoyed listening and could not understand why others were pointing toward bias. But I became suspicious when there were disrespectful attacks on FDR and JFK whom I respect as much as I respect Ronald Reagan. I believe authors broke basic rule that historians true historians: they should not be partizan in their writing and try to be as objective as possible. Rabid hatred of Clinton family and painting everything dark is totally disgusting and unprofessional. Painting George Bush junior as somebody who astutely created "true democracy" in Irak and Afganistan is ...????. Should you write books to enlighten people in history when you are so naive??? Come on, only struggle between parties is an engine which catapults America into it's greatness. It is great because it embrace us all irrespective of race, religion or party preferences. The worst thing possible is that when only one party is in charge and there is no competition. "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely". Of course, as a person with moderate conservative views, I would prefer moderate republicans to rule our country. But for best results, moderate democrats should rule the country at least every 8-12 years. And I would not hesitate to vote for Hillary Clinton despite the fact that I do not agree with some of her ideas.
While I found most of the history interesting, towards the end, when areas of US History I am more familiar were discussed, I noticed several inaccuracies. Several facts mentioned during WWII were just wrong. This made me wonder if there were factual errors in the other areas.
At the beginning of the book, I was told by the author that history has usually been written by liberals, and that this book was not one of them. I didn't really understand that until I got further into the book. The author maintains a theme that if government limited it's pre-occupation with addressing social conditions and just let capitalist economic forces dictate social change, America society would be better today.
I'd like to see an updated editation as this book ends with the fall of Iraq. I would like to see how several years of occupation of Iraq since then has affected the author's viewpoint.