jrice
08-19-2009, 11:11 AM
I've been doing a bit of research into Barry Goldwater's mark on politics and the events surrounding his presidential campaign.
I just completed "The Conscience of a Conservative" and I have to say I enjoyed the book - except for the final chapter on "The Soviet Menace." I was very disappointed in some of his views regarding this matter. I found it somewhat odd that he based all of his views in previous chapters on the Constitution and referred to the "Constitution" on numerous occasions within each chapter - with the exception of the final chapter. Did anyone else come away with this impression or am I off with this assessment?
I did find it odd that this book was not on the "Ron Paul" reading list, but perhaps his view of foreign policy is the reason?
Don’t' get me wrong - I liked the book and even Rand Paul used in part probably the most notable quote from the book in his speech in New York:
"I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution or that have failed their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is "needed" before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents "interests," I shall reply that I was informed that their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can."
Thoughts???
I just completed "The Conscience of a Conservative" and I have to say I enjoyed the book - except for the final chapter on "The Soviet Menace." I was very disappointed in some of his views regarding this matter. I found it somewhat odd that he based all of his views in previous chapters on the Constitution and referred to the "Constitution" on numerous occasions within each chapter - with the exception of the final chapter. Did anyone else come away with this impression or am I off with this assessment?
I did find it odd that this book was not on the "Ron Paul" reading list, but perhaps his view of foreign policy is the reason?
Don’t' get me wrong - I liked the book and even Rand Paul used in part probably the most notable quote from the book in his speech in New York:
"I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution or that have failed their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is "needed" before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents "interests," I shall reply that I was informed that their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can."
Thoughts???