Rating: 
Summary: If you don't agree.........WHY!?!?!?!?
Review: This book is an easy read. It provides very clear and very hard to oppose arguments. Some may not like that it endorses Ann Coulter. However, if you read Ann Coulter's books you'll find that she backs up her statements with a lot of references. Just look at her bibliography in the back of "Slander". If you're a liberal, I ask that you at least read this book, and before slamming it with negative comments in a book review, try to explain WHY you disagree with the book rather than writing vague, generalistic, (and juvenile) comments as to why this book (in your opinion) sucks. One would have to dig real deep in order to come up with rational arguments to what Mark Smith has to say in his book. Give it a try. If you actually do have valid, well thought arguments, with the points he makes please do e-mail me at nathan4352@yahoo.com
Rating: 
Summary: Join the Right Side
Review: Mark Smith's book is full of great arguments and counter arguments to a host of common street-level, cocktail-party banter spewing from Liberals' mouths. Next time you catch yourself in a social situation needed a quick dose of relief from the barrage of liberalism, not only will you be able to debate to the truth, but your words will rise above baseless accusations and hollow hate. You will stun.Sidenote: Move over PBA cards. At your next traffic stop, show the officer your Vast Right Wing Conspiracy membership card instead (included in the book).
Rating:
Summary: Common Sense!
Review: Far from being just a vast right-wing conspiracy handbook, this book is full of common sense and logic that even Hillary Clinton would have a hard time spinning. It's very back-to-basics thinking which I think would make our Founding Fathers proud. I highly recommend that EVERY American read it.
Rating:
Summary: Smashing the Loony Left
Review: This book shows that defeating the Loony Left is not only easy, but fun. In just two hundred easy-to-read pages, Smith throws one jab after the other (always leading with his right of course) at the liberal wackos, exposing their left side and shattering their glass jaw. This book is filled with scrupulously footnoted facts (my favorite--did you know that most species on the Endangered Species Act list are insects and invertabrates?), and is indispensable for conservatives who want to best their liberal friends and colleagues at cocktail parties and around the water cooler. Armed with actual facts, it's as easy as ABCs and 123s. If everyone reads this and buys a copy for their friends and families, the question is, will there be a Loony Left left?
Rating: 
Summary: Flimsy and simplistic arguments
Review: I would NOT want to hire Mark Smith as a "lawyer". His "arguments" read like the kind of "evangelizing to Catholics" pamphlets put out by Christian Fundamentalist that assume that the arguments on the other side are "stupid" and easy to demolish. Also, his own arguments are flawed in the light of how Bush has actually INCREASED the size of the Federal Government and instead of working to limit the power of the government over the lives of its citizens as is the libertarian goal of conservatives, has increased it through not only the Patriot Act but on how government regulations are geared not toward the boardrooms but the bedrooms. I hate to say it but this book makes Conservatives look dumb (except of course, in their own eyes). No, Conservatives need better arguments than the simplistic ones offered here.
Rating:
Summary: Good Briefing Overall, Though Occasionally Tautological
Review: In general this is a clearly reasoned book, and as a rule critics of the book try to deflect issues raised in the book with obfuscating criticisms not dealing directly with the contents of the book. Mark W. Smith is a trial attorney (yes, there are a few conservative lawyers left) and applies legal reasoning in most of his chapters as well as heavy doses of both deductive and inductive reasoning. The book is full of excellent general information (and specific details specific to each chapter are detailed in summary form at the close of the chapters) and is designed as a convenient to read debunker of liberal myths. In general the book is very successful at doing just that, although I would have preferred a little more deductive reasoning in a few places with more clearly labeled premises, illustrated reasoning, and conclusions and fewer catchy statistics and facts. Nonetheless, for what it is, it is an excellent effort, and I recommend it. I generally agree with most of his positions (with a couple of notable exceptions) and enjoyed reading all of his positions and justifications. I particularly like that the book makes the reader think. It requires active intellectual thought to ponder what Smith is saying, and to form conclusions of your own. In other words, you don't have to agree with him to appreciate this book: by virtue of reading it, it requires any serious reader to more deeply consider their positions, and regardless of whether or not you are in lockstep with Smith or not, that's a good thing. The best feature of the book for my money are the notes at the end of the book giving useful website addresses and further reading you may wish to consider. I have never seen all that information in one location before, and I consider it a very useful addition to the book and much more than a mere appendix. I look forward to hearing more from Mark W. Smith.
Rating:
Summary: Arm yourself with stupidity and lies! Oh what a web of lies.
Review: Arm yourself with stupidity and lies! This book defies logic, is poorly written, humorless and dry to read. This book is a big helping of overblown diatribe and bias. I read all the top political books as an independent; this was one of the worst. If Smith wants to compare flip-flops with Kerry-Bring it on! Smith brushes over Bush's campaign money. The Bush Attack Machine started to define John Kerry as "a captive of special interests". Then it came out that Bush had received more campaign contributions from Enron alone, than Kerry had received from lobbyists during all his years in the Senate; so the attack moved on to Plan B- defining Kerry as a flip-flopper and Bush as "steady and steadfast". Smith knows that anyone who has been in the Senate for eighteen years will have a voting record that can be distorted to look bad. If a Senator voted against a bloated spending-bill that contained funding for breast cancer research, they can claim that Senator is against breast cancer research. Ask John McCain-Bush pulled that one on him in the 2000 primary which Smith ignores. Now Smith's problem is that the attack on Kerry has resulted in lists of Bush flip-flops popping up everywhere. This is just a sampling of the kinds of things that are coming out: • When Bush first took office, he said the economy was so good we should have huge tax cuts, but now he claims we were in a recession then and that is why we now have record deficits. • Candidate Bush was very vocal in his criticism of nation building, but now President Bush is busy building nations in Afghanistan and Iraq. These nations are being built with our soldier's lives and our tax dollars. • Bush claimed his budget plan would reduce the National Debt. Instead, the federal debt has increased to almost $7 trillion. • Candidate Bush promised to protect the Social Security trust fund, but President Bush has already squandered more than $350 billion from the fund. (Consortium News, 3/2/04) • Bush said he would, "enforce fiscal discipline on Congress, because when spending is out of control, deficits increase and our economic growth is hindered...", but federal spending has increased 23.7 percent since he took office. (Bill Gallagher, Friends of Liberty, 12/11/03) • Candidate Bush proposed regulating carbon dioxide, but two months after taking office, President Bush changed his mind. • Bush opposed a Homeland Security Department when it was proposed by Democrats; but later embraced the idea and took credit for it. • Bush opposed an investigation of the attacks of 9/11-then he supported it, but his administration has done everything it could to obstruct the investigation. • Bush opposed an Iraq WMD investigation, but then he's for it because he has to pretend he's interested in why he was so wrong about Iraq's WMD. • During an unsuccessful run for Congress in 1978, Bush opposed the pro-life amendment and favored leaving the abortion question to a woman and her doctor. Then, like his father before him, he customized his beliefs to become more electable to conservatives. (The Nation, 6/15/00) • Bush promised money for first responders, but failed to provide the funds. • Bush presented his "No Child Left Behind Program" with great fanfare, but failed to provide the funds. • Bush continues to praise American troops, but continues to try to cut benefits for them and their families. He has attended ZERO funerals of soldiers unlike all other Presidents. • Bush said, "The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden", but changed it to, "I don't know where he is. I have no idea and I really don't care." To understand why steady and steadfast Bush would change his mind about so many important issues, you must understand the problem he faces every day. He has to somehow fool enough voters to be reelected, without actually doing anything for them or straying too far from the NeoCon's agenda. So, if a majority of voters want something-like clean air, Bush is for it. He won't follow through, or he won't fund it properly, or he will do the exact opposite of what he promised; but he will continue to be for it. If a majority of voters oppose something; then Bush will oppose it too, but he will go right ahead and do it anyway-while speaking against it. If that is the kind of President you want, Bush is your man. If you like conspiracy books Here are a few. Having read the TOP books in the Government Cover-up Genre; "Unconventional Flying Objects" (NASA UFO Investigator for 30 years) by the scientist Dr. Paul Hill; my FAVORITE is "Alien Rapture" by Brad Steiger and Edgar Fouche (Top Secret Black Programs Insider) - (Great fiction-soon to be a movie); "Alien Agenda" by the best selling author of 'Crossfire' Jim Marrs (Best reference on UFOlogy); and "The Day After Roswell," by Colonel Corso - I'd say these books are a MUST READ also!
Rating:
Summary: Good comebacks for almost every liberal remark
Review: I enjoyed this book very much. Mark W. Smith has hit the nail on the head with this one! Almost every chapter I agree with totally, except for the one about abortion. Mr. Smith writes that pro-abortion and pro-choice are the same, and that that analysis is a rhetorical dodge. He's wrong. (Pro-abortion means that in one's opinion, every fetus should be aborted. Pro-choice means that in one's opinion, a woman should choose for herself.) For the most part, this book is excellent, and I do recommend it to Rights and Lefts alike. It's logical, concise, and entertaining.
Rating:
Summary: An example of how "out of touch" the right really isn't!!
Review: Do you like Michael Moore? Hate personal responsibility? Think America is what is wrong with the world? Convinced that the government knows what is best for you? Then DON'T READ THIS BOOK - unless you are willing to have some of your misconceptions challenged. (And we all know that liberals don't like to be challenged. ;^) ) Smith examines talking points/complaints those on the left have against the rest of us in America, and pulls it apart - not with high brow let-me-talk-down-to-you language, but in plain English laced with wit and humor. A little common sense and PERSONAL responsibility go along way!!
Rating:
Summary: Simplicity and brevity
Review: This book has been criticized for its simple responses to complex issues. It might be better said that this book offers simple responses to issues that can be made complex but in reality are simple. Congratulations to Smith for keeping simple things simple rather than turning them into lengthy academic-sounding treatise. The book's responses to "Liberal Lunacy" do not deal with all the nuances of the issues but it does cut to the central fallacies in these liberal positions and (usually) the central reasoning behind the opposing viewpoint. The book could have been made stronger by consistently stating the premises and assumptions that lie behind a viewpoint so that: 1) the often hidden bases for positions were clear, and 2) one could see what conclusions followed logically from those premises and assumptions. Still a recommended read for its clarity and simplicity on topics that are often presented with unnecessary complexity.
| 
