More divide and conquer. 2010-06-19

Reviewer: Ronald Peterson

In the 1930's and going forward it was communisim, now it's socialism. So many of the people we put in office use fear as a way to stay in office. They have another thing in common. They tell us what our problems are, why we should fear them and then who is to blame for our fear. Mr. DeMint's book is just this and no more. There is not one paragraph devoted to how to solve our problems. And many of the problems he describes are complete fantasy. I love Andy Grifith too, but darn if he isn't part of the Big Government problem Mr. DeMent insits is going to bring us all down?
This local government official has done nothing but taken a salary and provided nothing but bromides for his son to follow.

Wrong premise to begin with 2010-06-02

Reviewer: Night Owl

Just another misguided rant that misinterprets what socialism is all about; another attempt to make Americans perceive socialism as something evil, something to fear and fight at any cost. But socialism is NOT about loss of freedom (does ruthless capitalism make people free?) -- it's about mitigating the dog-eat-dog capitalism that is on its way to destroy not just this country but the entire planet. Stupid, regressive book.

More apt title should be, "Saving Theocracy" 2010-04-28

Reviewer: C. Kronquist

Do you believe that the government should be neutral when it comes to religion and let the free marketplace of ideas debate the question of a deity? Well, then according to DeMint you are a socialist. You might say, what!?! According to DeMint there is no difference between the two, he uses secular socialist as almost one word throughout much of the book. So, if you are a secularist who believes fully in capitalism or a Christian socialist then you must not really exist then. DeMint talks about freedom but he depores a right to privacy. He must never have read the 9th Amendment which guarantees rights not already listed in the Bill of Rights. If privacy isn't one of them, I don't know which ones are. Maybe according to DeMint it is a right to exploit labor at Wal Mart supplier factories. DeMint supports the ability of the government to outlaw politically incorrect sex, or in other words sex between two consenting men. It's amazing the same people who want the government to lock up two men having sex seem (not saying specifically DeMint-don't know what websites he watches at night) to be ok with watching two women having sex on video. The hypocrisy that dare not speaks its' name?

DeMint also believes that if the government is not saying his religion is true, then it is oppressing his religious beliefs. Common religious right opinion though. He believes that secularists (not knowing that many secularists also believe in a deity) want to oppress religious belief. No, they want the government to be neutral on religion. Frankly, I don't think he actually knows what the word secularist means. DeMint believes that if a prayer doesn't mention Jesus or the Christian religion, specifically, then it is perfectly fine and ok to use governmental money and resources to tell children through a governmental committee that a deity exists. After all, how dare people be upset that the government is indoctrating your child in Jim DeMint's religious beliefs. Frankly, too many on the religious right (not saying all Christians) remind of of spoiled children. They want the government to tell everyone their religion is true, to worship their deity, to believe in their deity, to pray to their deity and if the government doesn't do that they wail that it is unfair. I say, grow up. If your religion is correct then it doesn't need the government of one nation on a tiny planet in an obscure galaxy in a giant universe.

There is no content to this book 2010-04-13

Reviewer: Surreal

The problem with Jim Demint's book "Saving Freedom" is that it has no real content. Most of the book is told as a series of parables that must be greatly stretched to actually "make" his point. The intervening text is mostly meaningless hyperbole. As an example, Robin Hood is cited as an example of the government stealing from the rich, which really makes no sense at all seeing how Robin Hood was an outlaw. Another one is the story of the gingerbread man, where the fox is government. You could equally say that the fox is the ruling class or the gingerbread man is the US military. Or that Jim Demint is the fox and the people who are disaffected from the Republican Party are the gingerbread man. Or that the fox is the Dark Side of the Force and the gingerbread man Anakin Skywalker. The fact that you can fit nearly any concept into these parables renders them completely meaningless.

There are no facts in this book. Jim Demint defines freedom as the right to be a wage laborer or collect capital, leaving no room for people who might interpret the vague word differently. The right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness are not "freedom" - in fact, to believe in such ideals means you are an (evil) socialist.

He actually professes open hate for democracy, saying that it led to the fall of Rome (which was actually swallowed up by its own mercenaries and the movements of nomadic peoples closer to Rome) and "Greece" (as he is apparently unaware that there was no "Greece" but a series of city-states that were only loosely connected). He also incorrectly states that the US was founded on Reformation ideals when it was, in fact, founded on the far different ideals of the Enlightenment era - the "Rights of Man" and ideas such as this. Remember, a large portion of the founding fathers of the US were actually atheists. I'm not saying that atheists are better or that America is or should be atheist, but that these people were probably not using religious ideals to guide them.

So let's be honest. This is a book for people who are politically leaning towards the far right, the older demographic of people who supported the now-defunct Minuteman group (and a lot of whom, ironically, are on social[ist] programs such as Social[ist] Security or Medicare/Medicade). It is hostile to pretty much everyone else, and won't really sway or give you anything to make you consider - unless you are swayed by pure rhetoric. This is a book that is preaching to the choir.

Saving Freedom 2010-04-10

Reviewer: Nellie C. Costner

The book is objectively written by a concerned American, who
still has hope for our great nation.