Rating: 
Summary: Conservative Dining
Review: This book is another in a long line of evidence that many of our jurists are going stark raving mad. Except for the three bad liberal reviews ahead of this one( one of which wrote a five star review for that old cuss, Leo Buscalia's latest "advise to the lovelorn and those that will never find love because they are crazy"...seriously, does anyone still read Leo?), the other reviewers seem to realize this. The question is what can be done and I agree with the author... it's tough particularily when congress and the Prez don't seem to want to do anything about these judicial zanies... Remember that California got rid of Rose Bird and two other state supremes for their refusal to apply the death penalty, actually flaunting doing their duty in front of the people for ten years, daring them to do anything about it...the people did, and Rose was out and even then she never "got it". Get this book...you need it to fight the liberal virus of "gonna get ya". One way or the other, they mean it.
Rating:
Summary: A How To For Taking Back Our Constitution
Review: A most important book, about social injustices by our judges, written by one of America's brightest intellectuals is finally available for everyone to read. Phyllis Schlafy has done it again; she's written a completely honest portrayal about how our country and our constitution are being torn asunder by radical judges. In her book, Ms. Schlafy offers a checklist on how we can take our constitution back from judges who "write" law in favor of special interest groups.
Ms. Schlafy received a scholarship to Harvard graduate school at a time when Harvard wasn't accepting women students. The feminists in the crowd can't stand her, even if she is a woman, because she was a leader and victorious in the fight against the ERA. How did she do that? She won the fight by building a solid base of support made mostly of women.
Ms. Schlafy has written many books about our political and social landscape on subjects from Henry Kissinger to abortion and the travesties of the feminist movement ("Feminist Fantasies"). But, her most recent book, "The Supremacists" is one of her most crucial and absolute best.
I would hope that every American would read this book, but that isn't going to happen. However, I challenge every American who has an open mind to read it.
Rating: 
Summary: Endorsed by Edwin Meese and George W. Bush
Review: As to be expected of a book endorsed by Edwin Meese and George Bush, this book talks about how to permit right wing fascism by undermining the balance of power afforded by the Judicial Branch. Phyllis is in her typical form, blasting judges for such things as ending segregation and protecting human rights. Like another reviewer said, past the title there is nothing new. If you want to see where people like Reverend Pat Mahoney, Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell get their ideas of how to destroy this country by breaking down the balance of power so that they can build a murderous Theocracy, this book is for you.
Rating: 
Summary: This book shows how the Constitution provides a remedy
Review: Chapter 12 of this book describes in detail how the Constitution has articles that allow Congress to apply checks and balances to the Judicial branch, just as the Legislative and Executive branches routinely apply checks and balances to one another. The checks and balances available to be applied to the Judiciary are in fact applied on a daily basis ALREADY. Mrs. Schlafly describes examples in Chapter 12.
Rating:
Summary: Clearly describes the problem with the courts
Review: Great book. This is the only book that correctly identifies judicial supremacy as the core of the problem with the courts, and gives practical suggestions on what to do about it. For example, we don't need a constitutional amendment to stop same-sex marriage, because Congress can just withdraw court jurisdiction to DOMA (Defense Of Marriage Act). This book clearly proves that the courts do not need to be making law in the way that they do. It all started in the Warren Court about 50 years, and the bad, activist, anti-democratic decisions have been the result of erroneous thinking about the constitutional role of the courts.
Rating:
Summary: Oh no..not again!
Review: I first discovered Mrs. Schlafly about two years ago when I caught her, quite by accident, on a news program speaking about her infamous book THE POWER OF THE POSITIVE WOMAN. I laughed. I thought it was a joke. Too bad it wasn't--I've read that one too. Mrs. Schalfly does it again with her most recent book, telling only one side of the story and basing her argument on the Word of God, to which she apparently has more authority than anyone other than the attendees at the Last Supper. This book is definitely worth a read--it shows the serious conservative flaws with the cry of "activist judges!" Once again, all she's really done is shown the world that what she's saying really isn't worth saying at all. But God Bless America for recognizing her right to say it. Read it, but don't buy it. Check it out from your local library.
Rating:
Summary: Not convincing and overly political
Review: I knew mrs Schlafly's ideas from reading her columns at townhall, and this book therefore taught me nothing new. If you read the book description that is displayed above, there is no more need to buy this book.
Her point: modern judges are doing a bad job because the interpret the constitution instead of listening to the majority.
Rating:
Summary: Doesnt make sense
Review: I saw Schlafly on Fox. In one breath she seems to think the Constitution is great. On the other side she has no problem with the Congress telling federal courts what they can and can't do. Seems that Schlafly doesnt think checks and balances of the branches arent in the Constitution.
Rating:
Summary: Great book - doesn't go far enough
Review: Phyllis Schlafly masterfully presents the core problem in American government today: there are no checks and balances when it comes to judicial power.
As an attorney I know from experience that there is one rule that trumps all other rules: judges do as they please. We have a Nevada supreme court which ruled that an amendment to the Nevada constitution was, effectively, unconstitutional and therefore refused to enforce it.
There is no doubt that judges see their branch of government as superior in authority to the legislative and executive - combined. They do not recognize the other two branches of government as legitimate checks and balances to their own power.
The Supremacists is a compelling review of the problem we face today, Phyllis Schlafly sets forth some useful ideas to reverse our slide into judicial tyranny. Her only fault is that she does not go far enough.
Rating:
Summary: Let's hear the arguments and examine the evidence.
Review: This book is an excellent summary and analysis of our current constitutional predicament. Even if Mrs. Schlafly's legal and historical arguments are incorrect--and I don't believe they are--it is at least a problem that the behavior of the courts in recent decades has become such a source of division. We need a way out of this mess, and we won't find it by being complacent.The previous review speaks for itself. For every person on the Right who is annoyed by challenges to his unexamined opinions, there is at least one such person on the Left. Is it really so obvious, for instance, that there is no problem with the Supreme Court seeking "precedents" for its opinions in the legislation and case law of foreign countries? Is it irrational to wonder whether one judge should be permitted to nullify laws passed by a majority of citizens--based on his divination of the "motives" behind the law? Are we so sure that this is what the Founding Fathers had in mind--or that our judgment is better than theirs?
|
