Best presidents & head of state biographies according to redditors
We found 201 Reddit comments discussing the best presidents & head of state biographies. We ranked the 77 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.
There's actually a whole book sort of about this: Commander in Cheat. Rick Reilly lays out all of the massively pathetic ways that Trump cheats at golf just to inflate his image. I wouldn't be surprised if hosts a private golf tournament at Doral after all this booing just to rally his ego.
Rick Reilly wrote a book about this earlier this year - Commander in Cheat - and it's hilarious and exactly what you'd expect.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0316528080/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_LXwLDb43VQ2FW
“The caddies got so used to seeing him kick his ball back onto the fairway they came up with a nickname for him: ‘Pele.’” Basically endless anecdotes about him cheating, winning seniors tournaments he was too young to be in but then claiming he won the pro tournament.
Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't a main premise of the movie that it is OK to judge someone's character based on the people in their lives and where they have drawn inspiration from at one point or another?
If you were to accept all of these judgments of Obama based on his relationship with the memory of his father, and the people that he has known throughout his life, wouldn't you also need to accept that Paul Ryan is a wealth-worshipping atheist who believes that selfishness is a virtue and that working towards one's own self-interest is the highest work one can do, as Ayn Rand espoused? He has certainly talked extensively in the past about how much of an influence she had on him.
IIRC, Ryan has since claimed that he has changed his views, and has moved away from the ideas of Ayn Rand, since they do not align with his Catholic values. To believe this, you must accept that people change.
This movie is based all around a book that Obama wrote 17 years ago. Sure, D'Souza uses Obama's own words to build his case, but doesn't it seem odd that he would completely leave out Obama's more recent book, The Audacity of Hope, written in 2006? Isn't it possible that this new book might shed some light on how the man's feelings and views have evolved over those 11 years?
I have known some bad people in my life. Does that make me a bad person? My brother, when going through adolescense, got mixed up with skinheads and neo-Nazis; yet, he is one of the most caring and tolerant people I know. That was simply a phase. People change.
It does not seem very fair to cherry-pick a man's past to build a narrative about him. Why not just ask the man himself? Or explore answers to these questions by discussing his more recent book. The tagline for the movie is "Love him or hate him, you don't know him", but it does not really seem like D'Souza has tried very hard to get to know him.
I do not personally know the President. But I also do not think that it is fair to judge someone entirely on who they have known throughout their life. Confucius suggested that we ought to only hang out with our betters, so that we can become better ourselves. I would suggest that it can be just as beneficial to spend time with people who are not our betters, since we can learn lessons from them as well, even if only in the form of negative examples.
Whatever Obama's father was like or who he has known in his life, I think the most important judgements of him should come from judging his actions, the policies he has tried to put in place, the things he has said most recently, as they reflect, either directly or indirectly through subtext, his current thoughts and ideals. I have not seen him enact or attempt to enact anything that is as radical and extreme as some make him out to be.
Judge the man on what he does, not on who he has known, that's all I'm suggesting.
Also, I wonder if more or less people would see this movie if it shared the title of the book that it was based on, "The Roots of Obama's Rage", with the awesome evil red Obama head on the cover, haha.
http://www.amazon.com/Roots-Obamas-Rage-Dinesh-DSouza/dp/1596986255
https://www.amazon.com/You-Give-Pig-White-House/dp/1250256410 because it has pictures of the inside.
https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/if-you-give-a-pig-the-white-house-faye-kanouse/1131003756#/ link to the Barnes & Noble site.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/barnes-noble-trump-pig-children/ Snopes page for the inevitable and predictable conservative outrage.
Absolutely!
For TR, I highly recommended Edmund Morris’ Three Volume bio . The first volume, The Rise of Theodore Roosevelt, won a Pulitzer and is one of my all-time favorite books.
For a general social and political history of the times, check out “The Bully Pulpit by Doris Kearns Goodwin.
There have been a couple of bios on Alice, but the two best that I have read were Alice by Stacey A. Cordery and Hissing Cousins
which chronicles and parallels her life and rivalry with her First Cousin, Eleanor.
For FDR, my favorite single volume bio is Traitor To His Class by HW Brands. It’s been criticized in certain Right Wing circles as “too biased”, but screw those assholes.
For a generalized overview of the Roosevelt family, check out Ken Burns’ doc, The Roosevelts: An Intimate History. It’s on Netflix.
That’s just scratching the surface, but I have found that to be the most accessible and readable stuff.
> I cannot take the shit seriously with conspiracy theories and nonsense
Research "The Boys on the Tracks" and look through some of the lists and read up (gonna take some hours) before you make up your mind.
Conspiracies are real. Its how we got Vietnam, Watergate, the Iran-Contra affair, the Keating Five, the first gulf war, the second gulf war, do I need to go on? How many lives and how much money were lost/made just on those verified conspiracies I just listed? All of which were at the beginning "pooh-poohed" just as you're doing now.
I sure as hell don't believe that the list on (for example) Arkancide.com represents "the truth." But there are a lot of unsolved murders and suspicious deaths around the Clintons. A fucking lot. I don't have the time or resources to check all the stories, but I've done some cross-checking and a lot of the stories are true regarding the deaths. The connections to the Clintons are usually very clear, but of course, that doesn't prove guilt. It is a very grey area.
https://www.amazon.com/Partners-Crime-Clintons-Monetize-Personal/dp/1944229337
FBI anon said that although not 100% correct, he was on the right track in this book
From the ancient and classical ages through the early middle ages, rulers often justified their claims to the throne by their ability to lead men in combat, and had to place themselves at the forefront of battles in order to maintain the respect of their subordinates. Later, as armies grew larger and battles became both more dangerous and more confused (gunsmoke, noise, etc), commanders would have to hang back and direct rather than lead outright. The late, great John Keegan's book The Mask of Command tells the tale of this transition, from Alexander to Hitler.
And as to why they didn't all get killed immediately, I would imagine that part of the reason is the historic practice of capturing enemy nobility for ransom. Also, a leader suck as Alexander the Great, even when leading his army from the front, would be attacking opposing knights on horseback, not the mass of footsoldiers that comprised the majority of both armies. That's where the glory and honor was.
The Boys on the Tracks: Death, Denial, and a Mother's Crusade to Bring Her Son's Killers to Justice
https://www.amazon.com/Boys-Tracks-Mothers-Crusade-Killers/dp/0312198418 this book is excellent and there were more than two boys murdered.
For the most part, modern borders became defined and 'rigid' due to the Paris Peace Conference held in 1919.
I'd love to expand on this story but time does not permit me to do so.
Read Paris 1919 if you get the chance, it's a great read and very insightful
Couple of excerpts:
>Sometimes, when Mr. Trump cheats to win at golf, it’s so outlandish all you can do is laugh. NBC sports announcer Mike Tirico lost to Mr. Trump one day when Mr. Trump secretly kicked Mr. Tirico’s pin-hugging ball into a bunker. What did Mr. Tirico do? He smiled and paid up.
>He will actually chip away from the green sometimes in order to avoid bunkers. If he gets in one, plenty of people have seen him just throw it out, saving him the trouble.
I've heard Destiny say the only compliment about Trump he could think of is that apparently he is a skilled golfer. I just read this article talking about how much Trump cheats at golf. Not something I knew but not surprising in the least.
But also it's kinda funny/bizarre that someone wrote a whole book about how Trump plays golf: https://www.amazon.com/Commander-Cheat-Golf-Explains-Trump-ebook/dp/B07H4Z26T7
Here
Also, there was a great book written by Mara Leveritt on the case
Finally, the podcast True Crime Garage did a 3 or 4 part deep dive into this case. It was a great, and I would highly recommend listening.
When I saw he hired Geithner, I hoped it was a "keep your friends close, your enemies closer" move to finally reign in Wall St. Turns out, Obama's just as much in bed with the Goldmans of this world as the Bush Dynasty.
Book published earlier this year called The Worst President in History: The Legacy of Barack Obama has 200 reasons.
Are you serious? Link Link
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B000N0WTC4/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1
The information is out there. Just because you have not spent the time researching the subject does not mean it could not possibly be true.
I recommend this book as a starting point: http://www.amazon.com/Family-Secrets-Dynasty-Powerful-Influence/dp/B002T45028
In it, you will find the discussion of how Allen Dulles got agents placed on the boards of companies that produce academic textbooks.
Also, here is a list of articles compiled about the influence of the CIA on academic institutions: http://dgibbs.faculty.arizona.edu/debate_cia_and_academe
"Wall Street & FDR" by the good man Antony Sutton might interest you.
Publisher link: https://clairviewbooks.com/viewbook.php?isbn_in=9781905570713
Amazon link: https://www.amazon.com/Wall-Street-FDR-Antony-Sutton/dp/0899683258
Kind Regards
Glad we're on the same page. Have you read Edmund Morris' trilogy on him? I really don't think I would have considered him an ass. He was a strong personality but he was an honest man who expected as much of himself as those around him.
I love the Mental Floss History of the World and Mental Floss History of the United States. Those two may be exactly what you're looking for. Also, check out Sarah Vowell. Assasination Vacation is great. Bill Bryson's work is excellent. A Short History of Nearly Everything is mind-blowing and I've heard great things about At Home which is next on my reading list. :)
Or too much Sarah Vowell. :-)
They are usually dead or in asylum in another country on condition they not talk. There is a great book of seven interviews with deposed dictators called Talk of the Devil that has some incredible chats.
The people themselves are not altogether that interesting. Usually they're in denial or blame it on someone else. The stories around them and their circumstances are fascinating though.
Theodore Roosevelt trilogy by Edmund Morris. Teddy was a fuckin badass.
https://www.amazon.com/Boys-Tracks-Mothers-Crusade-Killers/dp/0312198418
Please read before you claim this is fake news again without anything to back up your claims. It's so childish and so harmful to unsolved cases. I'm done with this conversation because there's too much to say and too little time.
Have a good night friend.
Allow me to recommend picking up a copy of John Keegan's The Mask of Command.
Concepts of courage on the battlefield change with the technology and its use in warfare. John Keegan has written two books that touch on this - The Face of Battle and The Mask of Command
He also joined a sex commune but nobody would have sex with him and was nicknamed "Charles GetOut".
Assassination Vacation
Yes! I like trilogies myself, so I'd recommend Edmund's trilogy on Theodore Roosevelt, Cornelia's Inkheart, my personal favourite fictional book trilogy, and This 12 book set, just try your best and push for more reps next time
Apparently my job today is to pimp books I've read:
About a quarter of Assassination Vacation is about Charles Guiteau. The rest is about Lincoln and McKinley's assassinations.
After reading the bookCommander in Cheat: How Golf Explains Trump this fake phone call act made sense..
Hey OP, you might this book it seems to be exactly what you wanna know. I read it and really enjoyed it. Talk of the Devil
> According to some site that no one's ever heard of, thats also is heavily biased.
Russ Baker (Family of Secrets) works there, and that's good enough for me.
> The point is they covered this story with the political motive of defending one of their "own"
You clearly want to believe that, but again, that doesn't make it true.
> Even IF she lied, it's irrelevant.
Yes, it's clear that you have little desire to hear the whole truth.
> There was literally no point to cover this "story" but to try to make Weiner look better.
Demand what you will, but as I read it, the point was to get to the whole truth, which is to say, the girl and her family have lied, and it looks like Weiner was catfished. Still, he only has only himself to blame.
Heads up on new book, Partners In Crime, credited with excellent documentation https://www.amazon.com/Partners-Crime-Clintons-Monetize-Personal/dp/1944229337/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1470000096&sr=1-1&keywords=partners+in+crime
If you like history, buy this and this
There's a whole chapter on the attempt to find the exact spot in the fantastic Assassination Vacation by Sarah Vowell. Vowell also explores how the Garfield Memorial is kinda super gay. http://www.amazon.com/Assassination-Vacation-Sarah-Vowell/dp/074326004X
I don't know why you are being downvoted Mr. Kedavarai. The oil trade plays at least a part in any Mideast policy. There are plenty of books detailing the Bush family's involvement in that nasty business. There are very close business alliances with the House of Saud as well as the Emirs of Qatar, the UEA and Bahrain. Those four houses of noble parasites are funding most or all of the Sunni jihadi movements in the world. So, in order to answer the question I posed above, you have to at least investigate whether influence by the GCC on powerful Washington interests is a determinant factor behind American actions
As I wrote (much too hurriedly LOL) above, the outcomes of all of America's theatres in the Endless War has been the ascendency of militant Sunni fundamentalists. When you get the same result every time, one has to at least examine whether that is not the goal. The connection that you cite between powerful Washington interests and the leadership of the GCC needs to be investigated
read it in this book
https://www.amazon.com/Commander-Cheat-Golf-Explains-Trump-ebook/dp/B07H4Z26T7
Sarah Vowell's book "Assassination Vacation" discusses this:
"Robert Todd Lincoln, a.k.a. Jinxy McDeath, was present, or nearly so, at three assassinations–his father's, Garfield's, and McKinley's."
In the audiobook version, Robert Todd Lincoln's voice is provided by our favorite tall, red-headed talk show host.
OK, with philosophy background and her current situation, you must get her this!
If you get something on WWI, follow it up with Margaret MacMillan, Paris 1919: Six Months That Changed the World
So is this the next evolution of Hillary's It Take's A Village?
"Assassination Vacation" by Sarah Vowell is essentially about Robert Lincoln's adjacency to the Lincoln, Garfield, and McKinley assassinations.
Well worth the read, and the audiobook has readings by Jon Stewart, Stephen King, and Conan O'Brien as various historical figures.
Assassination Vacations
https://www.amazon.com/Assassination-Vacation-Sarah-Vowell/dp/074326004X
Non-Fiction:
Alexander, I did not read this one, but I did enjoy his chapter on Alexander in the same author's book, The Great Captains.
The Mask of Command, while not only about Alexander, it's hard to go wrong with Kegan.
If you're interested in some historical fiction, try Steven Pressfield's The Virtues of War.
> this post makes the argument that the cutting of
> thumbs is a misinterpretation
I too looked it up, and it seems that you (and others) are right.
"... Gandhi recalled this incident on hearing that the British government was treating the use of the spinning wheel as a crime: 'It would not be for the first time in history. During the East India Company regime, spinning or weaving had almost become a crime. The labour of these artisans were so cruelly suppressed that they were obliged to cut off their own thumbs in order to avoid imprisonment. Many speakers mix up facts and say that the Company's servant cut off the thumbs of artisan. In my opinion, such cutting off would be less cruel than the terrorism which resulted in self-mutilation.' ... Gandhi is of the opinion that the East India Company's servant did not cut off the thumbs of the artisans, but the artisans did so themselves, out of sheer terror of being captured by the company's agents."
(Source: Khadi: Gandhi's Mega Symbol of Subversion).
> This is one argument to counter your claim
> that the West is sabotaging India.
Actually, it is not an argument. It is a fact. Please read Wings of Fire. It offers an insight of india's space and missile programme and how the west actively tried to sabotage it by outright denying technology or with threats of sanctions. Or this article describing how and why the US blocked India from acquiring Cryogenic engines for its rockets.
My point is, we are not pissed at the west for doing this. We understand that it's just politics.
> I'm saying that, in recent decades, India
> has been seen by the West as an ally ...
Oh, definitely. Unfortunately there is still a lot of trust deficit.
Many in India do not consider the USA to be a trustworthy ally. Many in the USA look at us suspiciously because of our friendly relation with Russia. The USA continues to supply weapons to Pakistan knowing very well that it will be used against India (India and Pakistan have fought 4 wars). India blocks many trade pacts of the US (or its allies) that it believes would just give the west an undue monopoly or advantage in trade over developing countries. We are founding members of BRICS, an organisation - composed of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa - formed to counter western countries economically. The US wants us to be a part of US-Japan-Australia coalition to counter China (and perhaps even Russia). And so on ...
Interesting times ahead for India and USA ... :)
I have read all three of Edmund Morris's biographies on TR, totaling over 2000 pages of Teddy Roosevelt's life. I also teach history. I doubt you can say the same. Here, do some reading before you embarrass yourself anymore.
https://www.amazon.com/Edmund-Morriss-Theodore-Roosevelt-Trilogy/dp/0812958632/ref=pd_sbs_14_t_2?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=RQ7AY9KEE1QXMDC17X0R
If you think TR is one of the worst presidents in US history, you have a lot to learn, and quite frankly, are delusional.
Both are EXCELLENT
TIL, it is a trilogy
"colonel Roosevelt" is the 3rd part
http://www.amazon.com/Edmund-Morriss-Theodore-Roosevelt-Trilogy/dp/0812958632/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1292697539&sr=8-4
I have not read many but Ian Kershaw's Hitler is amazing. If you're interesting in Philip K. Dick, read Divine Invasions.
Ian Kershaw is one of the world's leading experts on Adolf Hitler and his two-part biography on Adolf Hitler is great. Hitler 1889-1936 is presumably what you're looking for.
Recommend this to anyone who has not read this:
http://www.amazon.com/Wings-Fire-Autobiography-Abdul-Kalam/dp/8173711461
The Mask of Command was a book that I read. Other books on the CMC's reading list dealt with leadership, though not as exclusively as that one. I did the Marine Corps Institute courses up to 8xxx series on leadership. I don't know what else would be relevant specifically to your studies.
I'm not using ad hominem to deflect. I've explained my position quite clearly, and your responses have demonstrated either that you can't, or more likely refuse to understand them.
If you would like to continue this conversation, I suggest you go back an reread my contributions. You don't have to agree with them, but have another go at understanding their internal logic. You might also want to consider learning a little bit more about 1930s Germany. I highly recommend Ian Kershaw's biography of Hitler.
> my argument was that he's nothing like Hitler because he isn't attempting genocide.
You won't find a single mention of genocide in all the hundreds of pages of that first volume of Kershaw. You may find that surprising, since you seem to believe that the only thing Hitler ever did was kill Jews.
> the University I'm attending, which happens I be one of the top 30 in the world...
Hilarious. I myself attended one of the top 5 Universities. Does that make my arguments six times better than yours?
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0312198418?tag=duckduckgo-lm-20
> you actually added nothing of fact
You've missed my point. What I'm trying to say is not about facts, but interpretation of facts. This is why Zinn said that history is a weapon. It is a story, a narrative. And narratives can be incredibly powerful in affecting how we interpret, feel about, and perceive facts and reality.
To give you and example, the standard "mainstream" narrative about the American revolution is that the colonists, unhappy about their lack of representation, democracy, etc, under the British govt, and angered by capricious and arbitrary British decisions such as the stamp act, quartering of troops in Americans' homes, etc, decided to seek independence, so they could rule over their own affairs.
A leftist narrative, while not disagreeing with the essential facts, would instead say that the root of the revolution lay in the economic conflict between British entities like the East India company, and New England merchant classes unhappy about the monopoly on trade with the far east that it enjoyed. And the desire of southern plantation classes and land speculators who desired to expand into the Ohio river valley.
So that's the sort of thing I'm talking about here. Your narrative about FDR is a quintessentially mainstream/liberal/Democratic party narrative that paints FDR and liberal politicians in the rosiest possible light. It frankly smacks of mythology and propaganda (or do I repeat myself here?).
Real leftists would instead point out that the 1930s were a period of tremendous left wing/labor militancy, with clashes between labor and police that approached the level of open battles, and that it was this, rather than liberal politicians' benevolence, or correct ideology, etc, which caused the State and capitalist classes to relent and back off from opposing working classes so much.
Even this narrative may be too rosy (in overstating the effectiveness of the left/labor). It is also possible that the main cause of American workers prosperity in the 50s and 60s was simply that all our major competitors physical plant and manufacturing capacity had been bombed flat and destroyed, not to mention tens of millions of industrial workers been removed from the labor pool. The natural consequence of this was naturally the physical plant/manufacturing of the sole untouched industrial power running at full capacity for a while, and supply and demand driving up the bargaining power of American labor for a while.
> FDR contracted polio then found what life was really about hence the blue blood was drained from his being.
Uh... no. Lol.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0899683258
> Look at the infrastructure FDRs programs
Yes but what do you think that proves? Hitler built infrastructure too. Our own banksters build infrastructure if it suits their purposes. Did FDR pay for that infrastructure himself? Was that infrastructure somehow unprofitable to Wall Street and American businesses?
> how inequality increased dramatically with the Bush tax cuts.
Actually, income inequality has been increasing from sometime in the 1970s. Started with Carter, whom some people consider our first neo-liberal president. It's increased the fastest under Obama. And while Bush's tax cuts are probably not very helpful, they probably aren't as important as Clinton era's Financial Services Modernization Act and Commodities Futures Modernization Act, which set the stage for the whole mortgage securities-CDO-CDS bubble that inflated during Clinton-Bush and exploded in 2008.
> Trickle down never worked but is a talking point that works to fool the masses.
Of course. But why focus on a small lie? Let's consider a far bigger lie - that liberalism never worked and seems only to be a talking point to fool the masses.
> facts not made up "free market" ideology.
Sure. But are you sure you understand the use to which "free market" is being used in our system?
The main reason why the peasants and the sheeple accept tremendous wealth inequality in our system is that they've been induced to believe that the super-rich got their wealth in a "free market." I.e. they earned it fair and square in a "fair" and free system by virtue of hard work, intelligence, and luck.
And you reinforce this when you run around saying "the problem is free market ideology!"
It might actually be more subversive to say "we don't have a free market economy. It's all rigged monopolies and cartels. So the rich got their wealth basically by using govt power to force everyone to give them rents! It's all property accumulated by thievery and coersion!"
> humans nature is such that people need to be led.
More than that, we ARE being led. RIGHT NOW. But by whom and to what end? What I'm telling you is, by very bad people, and to very bad ends for the vast majority of us. So perhaps you should be telling people "HEY STOP FOLLOWING THEM!" rather than this worse than useless "oh well. We NEED to be led, anyways." I mean WTF. That's not the right thing to say if, e.g. you see people being led by Hitler, you know.
> leaders that lead well is a daunting task.
Worse. Possibly it is impossible.
> "depends what the meaning of win actually means"
My point was simply, if you don't get the policies and outcomes you want, you haven't won anything. Even if you manage to convert people to "your" doctrines and ideology.
> I guess you peg me as liberal.
Yes. You think and interpret things like one.
> Actually I consider myself a cooperative anarchist. See Emma Goldman.
No. Actually, you're a liberal. Because you think like one.
But don't feel too bad. I think liberalism was invented precisely to defang mislead and confuse leftists like you. So it's only natural it's so effective on you.
No anarchist would lionize FDR and the Democratic party of the 1930s so. Instead, they would credit labor and leftist militancy. Direct action. Threats of open revolt and revolution.
No anarchist would defend political authority like the Federal govt, or defend the necessity of leadership.
> Your jousting would be more valuable to me if you insert some fact
Most valuable thing I can do for you is recommend you go read some Zinn, and understand what he meant by "history is a weapon", and to point you to /r/anarchism. They're good ppl over there, they will set you on the correct path. Right now you're not an anarchist, more like a liberal democrat sheeple.
Book recommendation: I highly recommend the biographic trilogy of Theodore Roosevelt by Edmund Morris. Trust me once you start you will not want to do anything but read until all three books are done.
First book is called The Rise of Theodore Roosevelt
No problem at all. It's a two part biography, this is the first part, and the second part is called "Nemesis". https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0140133631/ref=dp_ob_neva_mobile
Hope you enjoy it.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0312198418/ref=tmm_fbs_hrd_title_0?ie=UTF8&qid=&sr=
Hijacking to promote Corsi's book, "Partners in Crime: The Clintons' Scheme to Monetize the White House for Personal Profit"
https://www.amazon.com/Partners-Crime-Clintons-Monetize-Personal/dp/1944229337
There's a book out right now about how Trump is at golf, and how it can serve as a metaphor for his life and/or presidency, called Commander in Cheat: How Golf Explains Trump.
The part everyone quotes is about his cheating, where according to people he's played with, against, and for (i.e. caddies and others), there has never been a single game where he doesn't cheat. Whether it's friends, "rivals", or even just playing by himself, there isn't a single game where he doesn't cheat blatantly and frequently. What inspired the author (Rick Reilly) to write the book is when Trump said he's won 18 club championships, when he couldn't corroborate with any source whatsoever that he's won even one.
Actually, again you have yet to provide anything conclusive to prove your claims, and again ignored the core of my post. I said that this was a tiny smidge of easily accessible data. So no front, you just need to not be lazy. Again you ignore anything that clearly proves you wrong, honestly I dont even know why I bother since you are clearly so deluded you cannot even read, let alone respond to anything outside your own (completely false) narrative.
Again nothing ad-hominem just observations any sane person would make about your replies. Your like one of those spineless politicians, when asked an uncomfortable question, you give a totally unrelated answer.
So yeah you want some book recommendations? Here you go:
http://www.amazon.com/Germany-After-First-World-War/dp/0198219385
http://www.amazon.com/Paris-1919-Months-Changed-World/dp/0375508260
http://www.amazon.com/Great-War-Modern-Memory/dp/0195133323/sr=8-1/qid=1158256555/ref=pd_bbs_1/103-5230486-6363002?ie=UTF8&s=books
http://www.amazon.com/Coming-Third-Reich-Richard-Evans/dp/B000HOJGLI/sr=1-4/qid=1158258029/ref=sr_1_4/102-5738646-8788965?ie=UTF8&s=books
http://www.amazon.com/Nazism-Fascism-Working-Class-Timothy/dp/0521437873
http://www.amazon.com/Fascist-Ideology-Territory-Expansionism-1922-1945/dp/0415216125
There are plenty more, but the expansionist rhetoric of the fascist states, especially Germany can not be overlooked. In addition early German planning to not fight a multi-front again indicates that they were indeed aware of a coming conflict in which they would be aggressors. Did they want to fight the powers they did? Well arguments can be made either way but certainly I'm sure they would rather have just been given massive tracks of land, hence the negotiations with England.
So unless you have some documents that show otherwise, this drastic oversimplification that Germany was merely responding to polish aggression is as I have said, nonsense.
I can't believe this isn't the top comment, but if you are interested in this and the other presidential assasinations then please read Assassination Vacation by Sarah Vowell
I actually learned this today too, in a completely unrelated manner. I just started reading Assassination Vacation
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1250256410/ref=cm_sw_r_other_apa_i_fmKQDb8DVKKMK
As historical writing is always in conversation with preceding work, I think it's quite useful to start with an older book. In the case of FDR, I think you'd do well to read Leuchtenberg's Franklin D. Roosevelt and the New Deal, published in the early 60s, IIRC. Like all work, it's a product of its time, so some of the claims may not be quite as relevant as they were ~50 years ago.
http://www.amazon.com/The-New-Deal-Modern-History/dp/1439154481/ref=cm_cr_dp_asin_lnk
http://www.amazon.com/Franklin-Roosevelt-New-Deal-1932-1940/dp/0061836966
The great projects took America out of the Great Depression within a few years of being enacted.
I haven't cracked them yet, but there are a few multi-volume biographies that get high marks (and since you say "the bigger the better..." :))
I also just had a friend send me Captain Sir Richard Francis Burton which seems like an interesting read.
None of these are explicitly reformed, so I apologize if that's what you're looking for. But these are all acclaimed reads about men with a remarkable impact on history, which is worth attention anyway in my opinion :)
I think he was covered in the book Talk of the Devil https://www.amazon.com/Talk-Devil-Encounters-Seven-Dictators/dp/0802714161
The guy was delusional well after the end.
I will jump in to point out that, no, it is not fun to play golf with Donald Trump. The man is a cheater and a liar, he kicks his ball, throws it out of traps, steals kids' balls, and lies about being club champion by holding championships at his new clubs before admitting any other members.
Source: "Commander in Cheat".
https://www.amazon.com/Commander-Cheat-Golf-Explains-Trump/dp/0316528080
As someone who has caddied and played golf for most of my life, I can tell you that someone who cheats at golf has serious mental problems, a lack of humility, humor, or grasp with reality.
I learned it from Sarah Vowell's Assassination Vacation. McKinley, before he was shot, visited Honeymoon Bridge over the Niagara but made sure to only cross halfway so as to not go into canada.
This may the pivitol attempt - the movie 'Obama's America: 2016' based on the best-seller 'The Roots of Obama's Rage'. Has anyone seen this, or comment or provide unbiased fact-checking on this?
While The Bully Pulpit was already mentioned for Teddy Roosevelt, I found that one a rather repetitive bore. It is not a bad book, and I still think some folks might enjoy it, but the way the information is delivered feels tedious.
For Teddy, try instead Edmund Morris's trilogy. While still dense with material, you can pick and choose what part of his life you want to look into. I actually started with the "last" book, or the one about his days after his presidency, Colonel Roosevelt and that is ultimately what got me interested in what kind of president he was.
> That's some really revisionist history.
Revisionist history is what the left has done with FDR, who was a center left elitist trust fund kid, whose family had strong ties to wall street and big banking and who himself worked on wall street as a speculator.
And lol at quoting a speech as some proof, speeches are always little more than pandering. Clinton has some tough speeches on wallstreet too. Like this one when she launched her campaign. Try reading a book on FDR's wallstreet ties, they are well documented, and the new deal was plenty friendly to big business, so much so that the ideological left in the US hated it as not going far enough during the era.
http://www.amazon.com/Wall-Street-FDR-Antony-Sutton/dp/0899683258
Farm income quadruple during the New Deal. Source
Based on the reforms of the New Deal (which were really stopgaps) they created a new conservative and didn't help blacks and sharecroppers as much as it should.
Finally, stow the faux outrage. I asked you a simple question of what decade and you flipped your shit. If you actually knew the damn answer all you had to do was answer it.
Instead, you go on with ad hom attacks and unprofessional attitude acting like an all around jackass with some high falutin knowledge. You aren't. I really don't care if you're Latino or not but you have a poor grasp on how to argue on the internet and you've yet to really convince me you know how to act like anything else other than a childish commentator.
You don't call someone a "Marxdrone" when you lose an argument.
You don't double down on a bad position when it makes no sense.
But you can present some facts to back up your claim or act like a child. It's your call.
Other than that, if YOU got some facts to refute the claim, I'm all ears. Otherwise, quit being as crazy as an SJW.
The Boys on the Tracks: Death, Denial, and a Mother's Crusade to Bring Her Son's Killers to Justice
\s But. .. this book confirmed what Rush and Hannity told me every day : Obama and the Leftists have destroyed this country with their destructive socialist agenda. Obama was the worst president in the history of this country. https://www.amazon.com/Worst-President-History-Legacy-Barack-ebook/dp/B01HE7KDWQ
But now that we have a president fighting for US every day, hes counting on US to aid him in his fight to take down the deep state once and for all with this incredibly powerful truth bomb. MAGA! https://www.amazon.com/Killing-Deep-State-Fight-President/dp/1630061026
\s
>Honestly, I felt that she was trying to thread the needle between sounding like she supported populist positions while not actually supporting them.
And I thought she was doing the opposite; trying hard not to sound like she supported populist ideas while actually supporting them. I mean, she wrote the book It Takes a Village, and she was the one who was working on universal healthcare when her husband was in office.
>Unfortunately, this really wasn't enough to assuage the progressives of the party who felt that this really was their moment and felt that they had been cheated in the primary.
It was mostly young people who felt cheated because they literally can't remember when Hillary was vilified for pushing populist ideas, while the older generations and establishment of course didn't back the guy who advertised that he was a socialist because they knew that was a bad plan in the general election.
>...the President is mostly about setting policy. Even if a President cannot get his/her policy enacted, the office itself provides a powerful bully pulpit to drive national policy.
Agreed, but having knowledge of the process and realistic goals is also key.
I also agree that Trump may be good long term, but only if Dems can get behind a single candidate who is more moderate; it isn't about the enthusiasm of the base but instead about generating enthusiasm among people who didn't bother to vote before and people who care about their own job more than anything else.
Also, if Hillary had won, the Republicans would have just dug in deeper as the party of obstruction; at least now they are on display as having no unified plan and cultivating the support of deplorables.
I guess if you know literally nothing about politics, are brainwashed by groupthink and never pick up a book... sure.
https://www.amazon.com/Worst-President-History-Legacy-Barack-ebook/dp/B01HE7KDWQ/