Essentials of American Government : Continuity and Change 2004 Edition w/LP.com 2.0 (6th Edition)

Rating:
Summary: Badly Written Text
Review: This was the assigned textbook for a local university course on American government and politics. I ended up dropping the course largely because of this textbook. It is written a much lower than university level and seems biased towards conservative viewpoints (maybe the non-Texas edition is less slanted). In the first chapter (fourth paragraph) I learned the following:

"It is part of the American creed that each generation should hand down to the next not only a better America, but an improved economic, educational, and social status. In general, Americans long have been optimistic about our nation, its institutions, and its future. Thomas Jefferson saw the United States as the world's "best hope"; Abraham Lincoln echoed these sentiments when he called it the "last, best hope of earth." But during the 1990s, for the first time in decades, some of that optimism faded. Many Americans were dismayed by the Clinton/Lewinsky affair, campaign finance abuses, and often the government in general. This disenchantment, some believe, led to the continued low voter turnout in the 2000 election."

Not only does this ignore the political turmoil and distrust spawned by the Vietnam War, Watergate, and the Iran/Contra scandal (all more divisive than anything Clinton ever did), but its only evidence of support is discredited later in the text when we learn that voter turnout was lower in 1996, before the Lewinsky affair, than in 2000.

Later when the text compares Democrats and Republicans we learn that Republicans like less government and that:

"Less government allows for more individual freedom and liberty. No government should be able to tell you that you can't own a gun, smoke a cigarette in a public building, or eat popcorn at the movies. You should be free to read the books you choose to read, watch the movies you choose to watch, and get together with the people whom you enjoy, all without government interference."

Well heck, sign me up for the Republican party. I sure like to eat popcorn at the movies! Darn all those Democrats and their popcorn-banning, book-burning, movie-censoring regulations!

Sometimes the statements are just puzzling:

"You probably already have a good idea of what the terms liberal and conservative mean, but you probably may not be aware that the meaning of these terms has changed dramatically over time. During the nineteenth century for example, conservatives supported governmental power and favored a role for religion in public life; in contrast liberals supported freedom from undue governmental control."

My how things have changed. Today it must be the liberals who think religion should have a stronger voice in government and want more undue government control.

The authors also rely on William Safire - conservative political commentator - to define the terms "liberal" and "conservative" for them. How balanced is that?