Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

I am very, very sorry I purchased this book, and am reconsidering my relationship with the organization that recommended it. Throughout the portion I read, Skousen relies heavily on "authority" (mostly obscure, so hard to rely on) in the absence of evidence, to support a very fringe thesis. Also, several of the sources he quotes don't check out - he totally abuses the biblical citations, and several of his other quotes are so out of context or inaccurate as to be irrelevant to the topic "supported." The book was too stroke-inducing to read in its entirety. I read the first 50 pages and the appendices, and I've concluded that Skousen completely fails to lay any foundation for his thesis. So I stopped reading to preserve my health. In a nutshell, Skousen asserts that the US Constitution is based on ancient Hebrew forms, which came to us via the Anglo-Saxons. In support of this thesis he presents an astonishing image of representative democracy in ancient Israel, evidenced by scriptural references that don't work (they are either out of context or simply don't support whatever he's asserting). On top of this, he asserts an Anatolian origin for the Anglo-Saxons - which is NOT taken from his stated source - suggesting that the Anglo-Saxons may be a lost tribe of Israel. He then represents Anglo-Saxon government as being very similar to Hebrew government. I must acknowledge I did NOT take the trouble to research the actual structure of Anglo-Saxon government, since everything else so far had been pure fantasy. Let's assume he represented it accurately. He asserts that Thomas Jefferson was a great admirer of ancient Anglo-Saxon legal forms. This may have been true; Jefferson was a great Anglo-Saxon enthusiast and I found one letter indicating he believed the English Constitution to have its roots in Anglo-Saxon common law. But since Skousen's objective was clearly to link our constitution back to the Old Testament, all of that is irrelevant. Especially since Thomas Jefferson was in France in 1787 when the constitution was written, mostly by James Madison. In addition to everything else, Skousen does not seem to understand that the Declaration of Independence is not part of the Constitution and did not establish the structure of our government. The rest of the book covers 28 "principles of government" that are evidently based on "Natural Law." I read only the first chapter, on Natural Law, and found it as deeply flawed as the Introductory material. Having rejected his thesis, I rejected his book, and skipped to the appendices. I have to add here that the book concludes with a list of "101 Constitutional Questions to Ask Candidates," to which Skousen helpfully furnishes "correct" responses. Don't bother to read this book - it's not nearly funny enough to justify the irritation it causes.