#BookReview: Toxic Empathy by Allie Beth Stuckey

There Is A Case To Be Made For The Premise Of This Book. The Text Of This Book Does Not Make It.

And ultimately, that’s the bottom line. Not because Stone Cold Said So, but because Stuckey was so utterly inept in trying to make her points that she didn’t bother to do even cursory research into the issues – at least, at bare minimum, immigration and police abuse of citizens.

Her points about abortion seem reasonable, if almost verbatim from the pregnancy crisis centers anti-abortion advocates run. Be warned, through this section – the first chapter of the book – Stuckey dives deep on being as explicit as possible on what exactly happens during an abortion. Not for the squeamish, but it is also clear that she is going for shock value here. So take it as you will.

Similarly, in Chapter 2 when discussing transgenderism, she goes for the shock value quite often again, while also making some genuinely intriguing points – many of which have been pointed out by various others (sometimes on both conservative and “progressive” sides) over the years. Here, she cites some work that sounds promising – but which another 1* reviewer claims has been retracted due to failure to obtain institutional oversight review approval. Take that as you will.

In Chapter 3, discussing LGB issues more generally, Stuckey actually shows probably the most promise of the entire text of genuinely being more compassionate… except that even here, she often ignores Christ in favor of some US right wing 2000s era talking point or another.

And then, as mentioned earlier, the last couple of chapters are just such *utter* trash that to even begin to describe them… well, let’s just say that it is *here*, in particular, that this book truly earns out my dreaded “gold mine” label. There is perhaps a modicum of genuinely good thought in these sections, but it is *so* buried under so much detritus that sifting through it may as well be moving mountains to find a fleck of gold dust. It is through this section in particular that I wish I had been able to see her bibliography, but this wasn’t possible in the Audible form of the book I read.

And, lest the reader of my review think I wasn’t going to point this out, there is indeed the constant and ever present proof texting – which is bad enough for a 1* deduction in and of itself.

Ultimately this is a right wing US political book calling itself a book about Christian thought… without ever actually (or, specifically, *accurately*) citing Christ’s examples in literally anything at all she discusses.

I picked up this book because it was being so utterly destroyed in my circles on Twitter – and now I have to admit that those friends and other luminaries were far more correct than I’d have liked about this book. I wanted to be able to defend this text – as I said in the title, I firmly believe that a case for the general premise *can* be made and even *should* be made. I simply wish Stuckey had given even a wet Dollar General paper towel’s worth of effort in crafting such an argument, rather than… whatever this is… that we ultimately got.

Not recommended for anyone but the truly masochistic.

This review of Toxic Empathy by Allie Beth Stuckey was originally written on November 1, 2024.

#BookReview: Polarized By Degrees by Matt Grossman and David A. Hopkins

Solid – And Solidly Dense – Examination Of The Topic. You know those jokes about the Christmas fruitcakes that are so dense you could use them as an anvil or even the cornerstone of a house? This… is damn near that dense. So be prepared for that up front, and it is a solid examination of political and even, to a lesser extent, religious polarization in the US over the last 60 years or so – with more emphasis on the last 40 years or so, when the authors claim that the “Diploma Divide” began explaining ever more of the results of elections.

Well documented at roughly 33% of the overall text, there isn’t anything particularly “explosive” here, but there *is* a lot of detailed discussion of what has occurred and why the authors’ research says it happened. One of the few books of its type where the authors are explicit in *not* making policy recommendations, instead taking an attitude of “this is the data we have, this is what we believe it shows, do with it as you will”. Which is actually refreshing – the authors note that they are academics working in academia, and even if they have worked with campaigns off and on at times, they are not politicians or political operators, and thus their expertise isn’t campaigns or campaign strategy – their expertise is in asking questions, gathering data, and analyzing that data.

Overall, while the outcomes are those we all know, Grossman and Hopkins add more data to the discussion – which is never a bad thing – and thus help aid in our overall understanding of what we have seen, giving us a more complete picture of the events as we know them.

Recommended.

This review of Polarized By Degrees by Matt Grossman and David A. Hopkins was originally written on August 30, 2024.

#BookReview: Distorting Democracy by Carolyn Renee Dupont

Distorting The Discussion. For a book about the history of the Electoral College that opens up admitting that the author thinks the Electoral College is foolhardy at best… the actual history here is quite good, and absolutely stuff virtually no one learns about even with a major in American History in college. (Perhaps Masters’ or PhD students specifically studying the EC or at least the Constitutional Convention that created it would know at least some of this?) So absolutely read this book for Parts I and II, where Dupont shows that the fights that we have today about the Electoral College have been there basically since its creation and have reignited every few decades since.

It is in Part III, where Dupont begins discussing the current debates about the issue, that her acknowledged disdain comes to the fore and truly distorts the discussion. Here, she creates strawman after strawman after strawman and “debunks” them… without ever actually getting to the heart of any of the arguments she is “debunking”.

Which is a shame, because throughout parts I and II, Dupont almost goes to pains to show that there have been some throughout American history who had at least part of the actual solution to the problems we now see – and were working to push that part of the solution through. In Part II, she even notes the other part to the solution… and glosses right on by it.

The solution that Dupont brings up repeatedly is the “District method” (vs the “General ticket” method we now call Winner-Take-All). Here, each Electoral Vote is, essentially, chosen by the popular vote of each Congressional District, with the overall popular vote of the State determining the Electoral Votes represented by that State’s US Senators. Going to that method right now would mean that both “large State” and “small State” (to use the Founders’ terms) or “urban” and “rural” (to use more modern terms) concerns would be more accurately represented in the overall Electoral College system.

But wait! There’s more! The item that Dupont glosses over is the 1920s era law passed by Congress capping the number of US Representatives at 435. This was the final nail in the coffin as far as how unequal the system currently appears, allowing even a District based Electoral Vote in Wyoming to represent 400K ish people vs a District based vote in Los Angeles to easily represent 3x as many people. But that is “simply” an Act of Congress… meaning Congress can remove that restriction at any time, even, literally, the day you are reading this review.

And then there becomes a point in the Constitutional Convention that even Dupont completely misses. You see, while I haven’t examined the relevant records myself (and perhaps Dupont could, and possibly release a 2nd edition of this text examining this), there are some who point out that the First Amendment as we know it… wasn’t the actual First Amendment. Instead, it was the *second*, and the actual First Amendment actually closed the “Representational loophole” that Article I, Section II of the Constitution created when it noted that the “number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty thousand”. Reading that carefully, it means that the population represented by a single US Representative has a *minimum* – 30,000 people – meaning that the overall number of US Representatives has a *maximum* – 11,234 US Representatives, based on the US population in August 2024 as I write this review. But notice what this does *NOT* do – set a population *maximum* – and therefore an overall number of US Representatives *minimum*.

THIS is where the fight over the Electoral College misses its most crucial point – and it is a point Dupont seems to be entirely unaware or even ignorant of. If this so-called “true First Amendment” had passed, it would have set the population maximum per Representative – and therefore the minimum overall number of US Representatives – at 50,000 – or 6,740 US Representatives based on current US population as of late August 2024 as I write this review.

Combining the District Method Dupont discusses at length in the text here + this missing “actual First Amendment” would largely solve every single argument Dupont has against the Electoral College, and yet she missed such a crucial detail of James Madison’s own efforts regarding the construction of the Constitution – thereby distorting the discussion from the get-go.

Recommended, mainly for Parts I and II, where most everyone will learn quite a bit.

This review of Distorting Democracy by Carolyn Renee Dupont was originally written on August 30, 2024.

#BookReview: Travel As A Political Act by Rick Steves

Interesting Take On Travel. I fully admit to traveling more for leisure than learning and certainly more than being some kind of activist. I try to be a decent enough human being no matter where I am, whether that be in my own home or some far-flung place. And I actively try to avoid other nations’ political issues – and wish to God their own citizens would join me in that, rather than constantly complaining about some aspect of the US. Indeed, there is exactly *one* spot that still stands that I would potentially like to see for something other than leisure, and that is the town of Nocher, Luxembourg – where my grandfather earned his Silver Star and Purple Heart for his actions in the closing days of the Battle of the Bulge. Beyond that, I’m all about relaxing and enjoying the scenery – not activism – in my travels.

But here, Steves does a remarkable job in showing his own travel style and general philosophy, of always trying to make the world a better place, of constantly trying to understand the people of wherever he finds himself through their eyes, of perhaps trying in some small (or sometimes not so small) way to leave their land better for his having been there, even briefly.

It is certainly an interesting approach, and overall his thoughts on the places he has been and the things he has seen… well, your own mileage may vary quite greatly indeed based on your own experiences either as a native of those lands or as an American who may have different views. Some reviewers have called this book “racist”, and to be crystal clear: I did not see any hint of that at all in this text – or at least the Audible version of it I consumed. But I’m also a white dude who grew up in the Southern part of the US, in the land still literally scarred by my own country’s Civil War over 150 years ago – so there are likely many in the US and internationally who automatically and irrevocably think *I* must be a racist, just because of my skin color and where I am from. Ironically, the entire point of this book is basically dispelling similar notions mostly from an American audience looking to potentially travel to other lands or even inside our own vast country.

Overall this was an illuminating read that, when read at 1.8 speed on Audible and thus taking roughly half the time its over 10 hr actual runtime indicates, was actually quite enjoyable. Dare I say that it could even be a good read/ listen… while traveling yourself? 😉 Very much recommended.

This review of Travel As A Political Act by Rick Steves was originally written on August 2, 2023.

#BookReview: The Shadow Docket by Stephen Vladeck

When The Pendulum Swings… Where Will Vladeck Be? This is one of those historical/ current event analysis books where, particularly in the “coming of age” of a novel (ish, as Vladeck shows) concept of the “shadow docket”, it will be interesting to see if the author is just as adamant against the idea when his own “team” is using it as heavily or moreso as he is when his political opponents do. Though to be clear, the history and analysis here, while necessarily hitting the current (post-Trump era) SCOTUS the hardest for doing this the most *because they have*, does an excellent job of showing just how we got to this point where it was even possible for this particular problem to exist at all. On that front… there isn’t a political “side” in current America or American history that is fully blameless in enabling or using this bad behavior, and Vladeck shows this quite well indeed and indeed seems to be a fairly objective-ish student and teacher of legal history. For such a dense overall topic, Vladeck handles the telling of the tale quite well, such that even people who have barely ever heard of the Supreme Court of the United States of America will be able to clearly see what the current problem is and how we got to this point and why both of them matter.

Indeed, the only real reason for the single star deduction is the slight lack of documentation, coming in at just 15% of the overall advance reviewer copy text rather than the more typical in my experience 20-30%. Though as I’ve been noting a few times on similar points of late, given just how many newer nonfiction books seem to be coming in within that 15-20% range, I may yet need to recalculate my seeming average.

Overall an intriguing tale, and one that every American truly needs to understand – and Vladeck does a remarkable job of making that particular task as easy as reading this particular book. Truly great work making such a dense topic so relatable and understandable, and very much recommended.

This review of The Shadow Docket by Stephen Vladeck was originally written on April 25, 2023.

#BookReview: The Ballot And The Bible by Kaitlyn Schiess

No Matter What You Think About The Bible In American Politics – You’re Wrong. This is one of the better books I’ve ever come across in showing just how the Bible has been debated throughout American history, from its earliest days through Trump, January 6, and even into how Biden is currently using it. And it does a phenomenal job of showing just what I said in the title here – no matter what you think you know about the Bible in American politics, no matter what you personally think about how it has been applied and should currently be applied… you’re wrong. While having perhaps a slight tinge of anti-whiteness here (in that the most heavy criticism tends to land squarely on the actions of white people), Schiess really does do quite a remarkable – and remarkably even – job of showing that no one is truly “evil” or even “uneducated” about the Bible (well, specific people in specific circumstances may be), they simply have different methods of understanding and interpreting it which lead to divergent conclusions based on both the text *and those extra-text methods*. And the sides have flipped and flopped throughout even somewhat recent American history such that neither can go more than a few decades without having to explain some prior interpretation from “their” side away.

The documentation here comes in at a slightly low yet still respectable 21%, and while Bible verses are cited throughout the text, there is no actual “prooftexting” here – verses are cited not to prove a point, but to cite which elements of which passages different groups were interpreting different ways at different points in American history.

Indeed, perhaps the only real valid complaint here is that I’m fairly certain this book could be a few times is barely 200 pages… and *still* not cover the topic in true depth. And yet, the depth it does manage to pull off in these pages is still quite remarkable indeed. Very much recommended.

This review of The Ballot And The Bible by Kaitlyn Schiess was originally written on April 21, 2023.

#BookReview: Free To Believe by Luke Goodrich

Decent Start. Before I get into this review, it is probably important that you – *my* reader – understand the perspective I’m coming from. And that is that of the “Doorkeeeper” of Sam Shoemaker’s somewhat famous poem “I Stand At The Door“. So look that up and you’ll understand why I’m approaching the rest of this the way I am.

For those “deep inside”, they will probably rate this book around 4* or 5*. From that perspective, it is solid but might step on a few toes here and there – and they’re not always going to like its slightly-more-pragmatic-than-many-of-them approach to its reasoning.

For the “far outside” crowd, they’re probably going to rate this thing much closer to 1*, though the more objective among them might hit it at 2*. There are just so many issues with the book, and this crowd will likely judge them more harshly than I’m about to.

So that is the range I would expect depending on where a particular reader falls on the scale of “deep inside” Christendom – particularly its American version – vs “far outside” of it. Standing at the door, I note that I deduct 1 star immediately the instant I see prooftexting, which is the practice of citing random Bible verses out of context in support of some point or another.

The fact that the prooftexting herein is so rampant – from the ending of the first chapter until nearly literally the last words of the text – and so invidious – several times very obviously taking verses *far* from their original context and meaning by any even semi objective reasoning and often times taking as little as a single word from a particular verse – means that I can’t rate this any higher than 3*. And we haven’t even gotten to the other issues yet.

The other issues being factual errors and logical fallacies, mostly strawmen but also a few others. This, from a lawyer that boasts of his perfect US Supreme Court record! Factual errors include claiming that a factory is a “typical” work environment in the US. It hasn’t been for many years now. Similarly, the author claims that “many” doctors were practicing while abortion was still completely illegal in the US, pre-Roe v Wade, which was decided nearly 37 yrs before the publication of this book. How many professionals – of any stripe – do you know who are still working after 4o years?

The strawmen primarily involve abortion, gay rights, and public spaces – which form 4 of 7 chapters in the biggest section of the book. Here, it becomes evident – particularly in the author’s discussion of gay rights – that his closeness to the issue from his professional work becomes as much a hindrance to what he is willing to speak to as a help in pointing out various legal aspects of the circumstances.

It is because of these final two issues that I had to drop my own rating from 3* to 2*.

There is much good to be found here, and at minimum it can help even non-Christians see what prominent Christian legal scholars are thinking. But the issues are simply too rampant to allow me to rank it any higher. Recommended, but should be read with an eye to what is not said as much as what is.

This review of Free to Believe by Luke Goodrich was originally written on October 17, 2019.

#BookReview: What Set Me Free by Brian Banks

Powerful. Particularly in the age of #MeToo, Banks’ story stands out as remarkable – and his grace and restraint even moreso. While the cynic in me wants to look at most of these types of memoirs as little more than PR, the endless optimist desperately hopes that the Banks portrayed in this book is the real deal. His final recommendations seem warranted, particularly in light of how his own case has turned out. Possibly the one narrative change I would have made would have been to end it at what Joe Public would generally see as the climax of his story – the moment he stormed the field as an NFL player and knelt in prayer at the 50 yard line. But Banks himself sees that as just one moment among many, and does a remarkable job of showing his public priorities of the several years now since that moment. Truly a remarkable book, and absolutely one anyone interested in the US criminal justice system in particular should read.

Because the publisher wants it, I’ll note here that I am writing this review on June 22, 2019 – 10 days before publication of this book. Meaning that it is in fact an Advance Review Copy. As is my own standard for *all* of my reviews, ARC or not, my review is my honest reflection of my experience with the book.

This review of What Set Me Free by Brian Banks was originally published on June 22, 2019.

#BookReview: On the Clock by Emily Guendelsberger

Intriguing Premise Hurt By Lack of Evidence. This is one of those books that has an intriguing premise and brings some often overlooked aspects to the table and is thus worthy of and even needed in the national conversation, but that is ultimately tainted by the author’s own biases and lack of empirical evidence and lack of extensive bibliography. The author does a phenomenal job of showing what it is like to work in the environments she chose to work in – an Amazon Fulfillment Center, a call center, and a franchise McDonald’s – and the people who work there. But as she admits repeatedly, she could always leave at any time she wanted – while she rarely if ever mentions what her husband does for work, she does mention during one ordeal at the call center that her father in law is a doctor – and the entire point of getting these jobs was to “test the waters” to see what people who worked them were really like and what their concerns really were. Very well written, just with significant flaws in reasoning due to her own biases, particularly in her ultimate conclusions. Could have been far stronger, but still a recommended read.

This review of On the Clock by Emily Guendelsberger was originally published on June 9, 2019.

#BookReview: Healthcare Is Killing Us by Aaron Fausz and W. Terry Howell

A Solid Plan. In this book, Fausz and Howell dare to imagine what *can* be re: healthcare in the US. They open it up with a chapter called “Imagine” where they detail their ideal vision for what healthcare can be, and the following chapters are tightly structured around different groupings of the ideals they lay out in the opening chapter. One of the best jobs I’ve ever seen of the old school X-N-X structure of essays that was once taught in American schools (back in ye olden times 30 yrs ago when I was in school anyway), the authors explain the general problem of a chapter, refer back to the subset of the “Imagine” objectives, discuss where we currently are and how the objectives can be obtained, and conclude each chapter with a “key takeaways” that refers back to the “Imagine” objective. In one chapter, they discuss the pharmaceuticals issue and largely discuss (much more generally) the same things Robin Feldmann goes into much more detail on in her recent book Drugs, Money, and Secret Handshakes.

How you think of their ideals and proposed solutions is probably going to be tainted by your own personal politics, but they seem to have an even head on their shoulders. They are upfront and repeated in their claim to be driven by free market capitalism, and they show how this very system – so often derided as impossible in healthcare – can in fact be used to achieve the best results for the most people, both in ideals and in actual implementations that are already existing in the real world.

Overall a very well done book that allows and encourages the reader to follow up with their own thinking on the issue and looking into the various technologies and companies discussed throughout. Very much recommended.

This review of Healthcare Is Killing Us by Aaron Fausz and W. Terry Howell was originally published on June 8, 2019.