Tuesday, June 03, 2008
Posted by:
Tom DeLay
at
10:16 AM
Now that everyone’s gearing up to read Scott McClellan’s new book, which I plan to read with a few grains of salt, I thought it may be a good time to suggest a summer reading list for conservatives. I would also like to hear some suggested reading from my friends at Townhall. Rather than waste time with preliminaries, here’s an abbreviated list of my “must reads” for Summer 2008:
Red Sky in the Morning by Bill Bright
One should know why and how this nation was created.
How Now Shall We Live by Chuck Colson
It’s crucial to know what you believe and why so you can fight for that worldview.
Politics of Prudence by Russell Kirk
How it all comes together.
Silent Spring by Rachel Carson
No, I am not joining Newt Gingrich and Nancy Pelosi on the couch. As an exterminator in the 1970s, this book lit a fire under me…for all the wrong reasons, of course. It’s always good to know the weapons your political enemies are using, and this is chief in their arsenal.
The Conscience of a Conservative by Barry Goldwater
Sounds clich?d, I know, but I know many conservatives who never cracked this book. It’s hard to stand up for conservatism if you don’t know what conservatism really stands for.
The Argument: Billionaires, Bloggers, and the Battle to Remake Democratic Politics by Matt Bai
For everyone who has been calling me a conspiracy theorist over the last two years, read this and tell me I’m wrong…
The Shadow Party: How George Soros, Hillary Clinton, and Sixties Radicals Seized Control of the Democratic Party by David Horowitz
David Horowitz is one of my favorite people, and he put more than a million dollars of research into tracking the network Democrat operatives have created. Check out the latest developments here: www.discoverthenetwork.org.
No Retreat, No Surrender: One American’s Fight by Stephen Mansfield, as told by me
Shameless self promotion, but it’s also one of the few ways I can debunk the liberal lies about me.
|
|
Jennifer Rubin responds to Andrew Sullivan:
Now, if [Obama] has changed his view and has come to recognize that McCain was correct in supporting the surge strategy, or even if he is open to soliciting facts that would confirm this is the case, this would be a remarkable turn of events and news to the entire country, the Democratic primary electorate in particular. No one would be happier than I to see a return to bipartisan agreement on national security starting from mutual acceptance of realities on the ground. But I just see no evidence, not a shred, that Obama has come around and reversed his views. He could clear it up right now in an interview or speech, explain the error of his ways and–with the same graciousness as Andrew–praise McCain’s foresightedness. But he hasn’t done this. So I would love to be as optimistic as Andrew, I just have no basis to be so.
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/rubin/924 1
Ms. Rubin is spot on. Seriously, Commentary has some really good conservative analysis.
|
|
|
You had your day in the sun. But you couldn't differentiate between conservative principals and power. And, having completely abandoned fiscal conservatives, while funnelling 1/2 billion in pork to your own district in 06, most of us see you as the problem - not the solution. And, it has nothing to do with charges or resignations. Like Hastert, you'd still be out of power, whether you were in office or not. And that's not some conspiracy, that's a result of your own actions. |
|
Actually, Tom, no need to apologize for mentioning your book, "No Retreat, No Surrender", since it's one of the better, more responsible conservative books out there, and I've always said that we could have a point-by-point discussion of your principles as articulated in the book.
Kudos too for mentioning Goldwater -- there's one fella not interested in the social and religious issues that are presently weighing down otherwise wise conservative thought. Real conservatives don't get idiotically sidetracked by the likes of "the War on Christmas."
But "Silent Spring"? Well, maybe something a little more current might be more apropos, if it's know-your-enemy time. There's an awful lot of Michael Moore out there, for instance. (No, don't buy it, silly; take it out of the library.) |
|
YES, indeed...re: your post on Tom Delay.
Much the same could be said for Gingrich and others. Dems: TAX & SPEND. These guys: BORROW & SPEND. And we have to pick our poison.
It was about power and money and pork, and beating Clinton. Not about rock-ribbed conservative principles. AT ALL.
10-4 |
|
Here are my four books for my summer reading:
Ehrlich?s Blackstone--Nourse Pub. Co. 1959 987 p. Blackstone?s Commentaries on the English Law are abridged, and modernized. This one volume edition is very handy. I even scanned my copy into a pdf file, have it on my hard drive.
The Debate on the Constitution : Federalist and Antifederalist Speeches, Articles, and Letters During the Struggle over Ratification : Part One, September 1787-February 1788 (Library of America-1993) edited by Bernard Bailyn
The Debate on the Constitution : Federalist and Antifederalist Speeches, Articles and Letters During the Struggle over Ratification, Part Two: January to August 1788 (Library of America?1993) edited by Bernard Bailyn
This set devolves from the multi-volume series from the Wisconsin Historical Society named The Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution?I will be reading the four volumes that cover the ratification in Massachusetts. My town voted Federalist. How did your town vote?
John Marshall, Complete Constitutional Decisions (Callaghan & Company?1903 799 p.) An anthology of Chief Justice Marshall?s opinions.
Happy reading. |
|
Have read most of that list. Excellent. Your reading material suggestions make DeLays' look pale in comparison.
Also:
Madison's Papers. (on the Constitutional Convention)
Jeffersons Papers and Letters
Alexander Hamilton's biog. by Ron Chernov
And a concise nice overview of the Const. Convention:
A Brilliant Solution by Carol Berkin
Thanx for the post. |
|
And anything by Thomas Paine.
AGRARIAN JUSTICE by him is excellent:
http://www.thomaspaine.org/Archives/agjst.html
|
|
Here is a little reading for people and it isn't as long as a whole book. The only thing I would say about it is that the taxpaying voters it talks about who voted for Bush--I think a lot of them were holding their noses as so many are talking now about McCain. Only McCain is worse.
How Long Do We Have?
About the time our original thirteen states adopted their new constitution in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years earlier:
'A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government.'
'A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.' (Listen to Hillary and Barak carefully.)
'From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.'
'The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the following sequence:
1. >From bondage to spiritual faith;
2. >From spiritual faith to great courage;
3. >From courage to liberty;
4. >From liberty to abundance;
5. >From abundance to complacency;
6. >From complacency to apathy;
7. >From apathy to dependence;
8. >From dependence back into bondage'
|
|
Now consider this:
Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning the 2000 Presidential election:
Number of States won by:
Gore: 21 (Includes D.C.)
Bush: 30
Square miles of land won by:
Gore: 580,000
Bush: 2,427,000
Population of counties won by:
Gore: 127 million
Bush: 143 million
Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by:
Gore: 13.2
Bush: 2.1
Professor Olson adds:
'In aggregate, the map of the territory Bush won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of this great country.
Gore's territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare...'
Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the 'complacency and apathy' phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the 'governmental dependency' phase.
If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal invaders (called illegals), and they vote, then we can say goodbye to the USA in fewer than five years.
everyone should realize just how much is at stake, knowing that apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.
|
|
|
ABOUT THE BLOG
The importance of the blogosphere in shaping and motivating the current conservative movement is unquestionable not only has it served as an important tool in breaking through the liberal MSM clutter but it has helped to keep our elected officials true to princicple.
This blog is meant to further the online discussion in the marketplace of ideas.
|