The History Book Club discussion
This topic is about
Unreasonable Men
PRESIDENTIAL SERIES
>
THE DISCUSSION IS OPEN - WEEK EIGHT - PRESIDENTIAL SERIES: UNREASONABLE MEN - May 30th - June 5th - Chapter Eight - The Insurgency - (pages 175 - 202) - No Spoilers, please
message 2:
by
Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief
(last edited Jun 08, 2016 04:58PM)
(new)
-
rated it 4 stars
Mod
Chapter Eight - The Insurgency - (pages 175 - 202)
This is a non spoiler thread. For the Week Eight assignment - we are reading Chapter Eight - TheInsurgency which begins on page 175 and runs through page 202.
Therefore, you may discuss any element or quote, event or person or anything else dealing with Chapter Eight and pages 175 though 202. You may also discuss anything that came before in the book - so the Preface through page 202 are the only pages that can be discussed here. Try to read with the group so that you are NOT posting any spoilers.
We do have spoiler threads where you can post anything - glossary, bibliography threads, the introduction and Book as a Whole thread.
But the weekly threads are non spoiler.
message 3:
by
Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief
(last edited May 19, 2016 10:55PM)
(new)
-
rated it 4 stars
Mod
Chapter Eight - The Insurgency - (pages 175 - 202)
Mod
Mod
Mod
Mod
What struck me most about this chapter was TR's ambition. Despite his protestations, you can see him realizing his opportunity and seizing it at Osawatomie. He may truly not have intended this initially, but the power of ambition overcame any loyalty he may have felt for Taft once the voices began to call for him to run.
This was for me one of the most interesting chapters. It's very well written and gives a clear picture of the situation and its participants. Once again, I felt sympathy for Taft, who, being a judge, "recoiled whenever Roosevelt played too fast and loose with the law." We see this concern also in the building of his administration. This was a very important aspect of his nature. Even his decision to fire Pinchot comes across as a well-thought and conscientious decision. I felt doubly sympathetic when I read that "in the eyes of the progressives, he could do nothing right." On page 195, he finally confesses his own disillusionment with his time in officeIt was also interesting to see the development of conservationsim - how it turned from a typical Standpatter issue to a progressive crusade (by interpreting it as a fight against the corporations).
The most crucial development, however, in my view, is the start of the New Nationalism in 1910. Wolraich describes "this concept of broad federal authority and obligation to the people" as "familiar to modern Americans." It is, however, being challenged today by some conservatives, and it's useful to know that it was not there from the start. I see how the conservatives of Roosevelt's time could describe it as "rank socialism." I wonder how much of this was a result of Roosevelt's travels and discussions with foreign leaders.
Taft had promised TR that he would make no decisions without considering "what his predecessor would have done under the same circumstances" (pg. 181). Did he break that promise? Although TR was on Pinchot's side of the issue, don't you think he would have done the same thing and fired anyone that was insubordinate, friend or not? This was public insubordination of the President of the United States and the issue itself, at least to me, was secondary.
Jill wrote: "Taft had promised TR that he would make no decisions without considering "what his predecessor would have done under the same circumstances" (pg. 181). Did he break that promise? Although TR was on..." It's a very good point. I think TR should have done the same. I don't know if he would have. It's hard to speculate, but Taft probably thought TR would have agreed.
TR almost seemed to not want to jump back into the fray and denounce Taft, his protege and successor. His legacy and his democratic beliefs spurred him on it seems. His circumventing the forestry bill (p.177) made me smile. Always tilting things in his favor. I thought the political climate seemed a bit more topsy-turvy in this chapter: the revolt against Uncle Joe, the whole Pinochet affair, Taft's blunders. With the representative votes, I found it hilarious that there's a record of men singing "There'll Be a Hot Time in the Old Town Tonight" (p.188) in the congressional record. :-) Those little funny snippets really keep the tone of the book even kilter and balanced with the seriousness of the political issues.
It is an odd promise, because it backs you into a corner as Taft realized. I'm not sure why he did it. Perhaps to keep the peace with TR? Perhaps Taft looked up to TR as a president? Make Taft's decision-making easier?
Bryan wrote: "It is an odd promise, because it backs you into a corner as Taft realized. I'm not sure why he did it. Perhaps to keep the peace with TR? Perhaps Taft looked up to TR as a president? Make Taft's de..."I don't think he made the promise to make his decision-making easier, but any of the other two suggestions are possible. Or maybe it was just a gesture of friendship and respect which was clearly out of place and which he might have regretted making.
Mod
Mod
Absolutely Pamela - the good ole days were not always that good.
This is a non spoiler thread so unlike the Book of the Month and Buddy reads - you do not have to use the spoiler html here - as long as you are posting about the current reading assignment for this thread or what came before.
Mod
Hard to say Simonetta but I think these are great questions to ask Michael Wolraich on the Ask Michael thread.
Mod
I think Taft was marching to a different beat and drummer than to the beat of TR's policies which he promised to follow - tough call because of that - Pinchot was sort of a self imposed whistle blower standing up for TR had promised would be done (in a way)
Mod
Jordan great insight.
Mod
Taft really did not want to be president and if somebody else could make some of the decisions - I honestly don't think it mattered to him much. Brandeis observed that Taft was a great Chief Justice but a lousy President.
I agree with Brandeis.....all her ever wanted to do was to sit on the Supreme Court, so I don't think he cared much if he was President or not Besides, he wasn't the presidential type.........who would want to follow TR in that position?????
Bentley wrote: "Bryan wrote: "It is an odd promise, because it backs you into a corner as Taft realized. I'm not sure why he did it. Perhaps to keep the peace with TR? Perhaps Taft looked up to TR as a president? ..."I think that Taft really did want,maybe due to Nellie, to be Pres but he did not want to do - not was his mental orientation such - that would permit a really successful carrying out of the task.
I think that TR felt some obligation in that it seems he had chosen, groomed and gotten into office Taft and then found that Taft failed to have the backbone or ability or loyalty to stick to TR's programs
Jordan wrote: "TR almost seemed to not want to jump back into the fray and denounce Taft, his protege and successor. His legacy and his democratic beliefs spurred him on it seems. His circumventing the forestry b..."It is hard to jump on your protege if you left the country, before cellphones and internet, and foundered - mostly it seems because he did not have the conviction of TR's principles
some comments on this chapterpg 175 para 3 - quote "what talk there was about forest protection was no more to the average American than the bussing of a mosquito..." - is reflective of the current situation about global warming - that awareness of Americans seems to have long been to not be knowledgeable/aware of much - the dangers are greater now.
-
This has been a really enlightening chapter as Pinchot was seen, as is mentioned later in the chapter, less stringent than John Muir and that has, for me, always declined his importance - but now I see a different person and I am afraid I will have to add a biography of him to my shelf of books to read (which I will probably die before I get to all due to the continuous stream of HBC options)
Pg 176 para 2 - Pinchot is part of TR's tennis cabinet - what a great thing (to my mind the best individual game in the world) - and maybe his friend - we will see as we move forward or explore further elsewhere,
Pg 177 para 3 - Pinchot and TR saved much of our forests - Yahoo! (not the internet platform)
pg 179 para 5 - so Pinchot is less "pure" than John Muir but maybe that is how so much forest was saved. TR may have had a great relationship with John Muir but Pinchot was his man. - So now Pinchot becomes a man of conscience - pretty impressive in overview
Pg 184 para 2 Aldrich raising money - what could he have done with a PAC......... if 2016 is a continuation of a struggle for "people power" we are in a lesser position against the so well organized profit oriented intersts.. - Yeah Bernie! (is it too late tonight yet?0
pg 192 paragraph last - Aldrich "simply didn't care anymore..." - so is that what happens to the needs of America for work and legislation when a politician gets tired or fed up. Is John McCain really running for a six year term in the Senate at age 80? is that OK? - will he get fed up? - he has already (and I like him even though he is not a hero) been unable to obstruct a bully trying to secure the Presidency
For me, the environmentalist, this is a Pinchot chapter - and though I see the Joe C losing the power and other points which fit into this story - and appreciate them - Pinchot is what I will carry with me for a long time.
Like the others, I really liked this chapter.I did wonder what exactly the author meant by saying that TR made decisions "with his hips" - I've not heard this as an expression before. I would have expected "with his heart" or "with his mouth".
TR was clearly conflicted. He valued Taft as a friend and wanted his presidency to be a continuation of his own; but only TR could be TR. I think TR badly misjudged Taft and that the signs of this were there for TR to see, from the start.
While no one was exactly like TR, Taft is almost the anti-TR. Teddy relished a fight; Taft hated them. Teddy was a political animal par excellence, Taft was essentially a judicial character.
One could blame Nellie Taft for a lot of this - she was the one really pushing her husband to try to become POTUS rather than SCOTUS.
I don't know if Taft came to do the things he did out of real conviction or, as Bentley remarked because it really didn't matter to him but I thought these lines were very sad - "Taft had finally come to see politics as the progressives did: a war with only two sides. But he chose the other side."
Oh my gosh! The rules change proposed in Congress! Who'd have thought the Congressional meetings would be the most exciting parts of the book?
Mod
Pamela wrote: "I don't know if Taft came to do the things he did out of real conviction or, as Bentley remarked because it really didn't matter to him but I thought these lines were very sad - "Taft had finally..."
This quote stood out to me as well in this chapter. In a time where progressive causes started to make some real headway against the stand patters, Taft certainly chose the other side, which historically, would be the wrong side. He also underestimated Roosevelt's passions as well. A costly mistake.
Jill wrote: "Taft had promised TR that he would make no decisions without considering "what his predecessor would have done under the same circumstances" (pg. 181). Did he break that promise? Although TR was on..."Absolutely, and he knew he was too. This was a great chapter that was read fast and this was part of the reason for it. Taft moved further and further from what he said he would do. But in the end TR still supports him.
Like Peter, I would like to know how one makes decisions with their "hips"?
Love reading this with you guys!
Vincent wrote: "Pinchot was seen, as is mentioned later in the chapter, less stringent than John Muir ..."Vincent raises some good points here. I have always idolized John Muir as the conservationist who, nearly single-handedly, saved Yosemite; since Gifford Pinchot was his nemesis in the Hetch Hetchy battle, I harbored a grudge. This chapter did place Pinchot in context a bit more, since his preservationist stance was still much better than the wanton waste of natural resources that permeated mainstream American culture. Forestry, grounded in "wise use," is less poetic than Muir's "hiking-through-wildflowers" environmentalist stance, but it is nonetheless admirable.
Jason wrote: "Like Peter, I would like to know how one makes decisions with their "hips?"Jason and Peter, sorry for the confusion. The hips reference was an allusion to Lincoln Steffens's description of TR from page 12:
Steffens liked Roosevelt, and they became friends, but he never quite trusted him to fulfill his promises. Too many of Roosevelt’s initiatives fell short of what was needed. As he got to know him better, Steffens could see that Roosevelt’s mind was committed to reform but not his hips, and it was those hips that made the decisions. Whether he was charging up a hill under enemy fire or running for governor, Roosevelt always seemed to act before he had even made up his mind to act. “You don’t think with your brains, do you?” Steffens asked him once. Those brains wanted reform, Steffens reckoned, but the hips hung back closer to the old guard. The hips were happiest right in the middle with one foot in each camp.
I love the metaphor of TR thinking with his hips and took some poetic license with it later in the book. The way I interpret it, TR's "brain" represents the political strategist in him, the "hips" represent his political instincts.
And, interestingly, the positions reversed. Early in his presidency, when most Americans were still content with the status quo, TR's instinct was to hang back at the center between standpatters and reformers. By the time he returned from his travels, the progressive movement was in full swing, and TR's "hips" moved in step with the country's new ethos, racing ahead of his "brain."
Kressel wrote: "Oh my gosh! The rules change proposed in Congress! Who'd have thought the Congressional meetings would be the most exciting parts of the book?"Kressel, I'm so pleased that you enjoyed this. The debate over the congressional rules was so arcane that it was sometimes difficult for me to piece together exactly what happened, and I did not find a single text that clearly and adequately explained it. So I put in a look of effort, working with history books, memoirs,press accounts, and the congressional record, to nail down what happened and convey it comprehensibly to readers while maintaining the sense of drama that accompanied it.
Fortunately, I had a lot of colorful detail to work with--the tattered paper in Norris's pocket, the crowd pressing so hard that people were pushed onto the House floor, Uncle Joe nervously ripping paper at his lectern, etc. I also love the little detail about Aldrich steadying Senator Smoot's hands as he arranges the railroad bill that Aldrich opposed.
Simonetta wrote: "This was for me one of the most interesting chapters. It's very well written and gives a clear picture of the situation and its participants. Once again, I felt sympathy for Taft, who, being a judg..."Thank you very much, Simonetta. I'm glad you enjoyed the chapter, and I share your sympathy for Taft. The question about European influences on TR is an interesting one, and I don't have a good answer for you. He certainly discussed world affairs, but I'm not aware that he spoke to European liberals about domestic reform.
I will say that this is one of the best chapters of the book so far. The struggle by Democrats and Progressive Republicans to loosen Speaker Cannon's grip on the House of Representatives was gripping reading. Kudos to the author for making what would appear to most people as a boring bit of parliamentary procedure into a struggle for representative government. It's also sad how Taft had hitched himself to the Standpatters so much at the beginning of his presidency that he became anathema to the Progressives whose time had seemed to have come in 1909-1910. I can't wait to see what role Sen. La Follett will play in the 1912 election, if any.
Another great chapter in this book. I am learning so much, and again am struck how history repeats itself. Taft complained that the progressives in Congress were determined to "defeat anything that the administration seeks." (p. 183). Taft didn't have the visionary leadership, communication, and relationship-building skills needed to gain consensus for his agenda.And then once again it was the cover-up that damaged an otherwise smart man, when Taft's denial about the Ballinger letter was proved false. Taft made several decisions that were fatal to his presidential career. He was thoughtful and analytical in making them, but that didn't help. He could have used some of TR's ability to decide with his hips.
Michael wrote: "Fortunately, I had a lot of colorful detail to work with--the tattered paper in Norris's pocket, "Gotta love that Norris!
Vincent wrote: "some comments on this chapterpg 175 para 3 - quote "what talk there was about forest protection was no more to the average American than the bussing of a mosquito..." - is reflective of the curre..."
Vincent's analysis of this comment was essentially identical to my analysis. No matter how many climatologist warn of the impending, most people don't seem to care.
As I was reading how the resources of the US were dwindling as its population grew, I could not help but think how obvious it is that an increasing population stresses and eventually overwhelms a society's resources. Overpopulation is the principal source of global warming and poverty. Yet discussion of population control - distribution of birth control, encouraging small families, limiting number of immigrants allowed into a country- has become an almost taboo subject.
I was greatly impressed by Gifford Pinchot concern for the environment and by him belonging to Teddy's "tennis cabinet". Did not know that Teddy played tennis. Thought he would be Rugby or football.
I was also greatly impressed by George Norris. The way he set the trap for Uncle Joe demonstrated a truly brilliant legal mind. I read some more about George Norris. He was adamantly opposed to the USA entering WWI. The following is from wikipedia regarding Norris' opposition. Much of the general principles he expresses are also expressed by Tocqueville in "Democracy in America".
WIKIPEDIA:
Looking at the war in Europe he said, "Many instances of cruelty and inhumanity can be found on both sides." Norris believed that the government wanted to take part in this war only because the wealthy had already aided the British financially in the war. He told Congress that the only people who would benefit from the war were "munition manufacturers, stockbrokers, and bond dealers" and added that "war brings no prosperity to the great mass of common and patriotic citizens.... War brings prosperity to the stock gambler on Wall Street–to those who are already in possession of more wealth than can be realized or enjoyed."
I felt sorry for Taft. He was a good man, but he was not suited for politics nor was he suited to implement or even support radical change.
Lastly, I think Teddy's speech at Osawatomie showed a remarkable understanding of what democracy truly is. It isn't a collection of people without a government as many libertarians and conservatives seem to believe. It is a government that fosters equality, opportunity, community, justice and human dignity.
Michael wrote: "Simonetta wrote: "This was for me one of the most interesting chapters. It's very well written and gives a clear picture of the situation and its participants. Once again, I felt sympathy for Taft,..."We may never know, but travel in general gives new perspectives, if you can actually stay in a country long enough to learn something. Due to different means of travel, leaders in the past were forced to take longer trips. I don't know if our super-protected leaders learn much in their day-trips to other countries. Besides, there was also a whole different attitude on learning. Mark Twain, a contemporary of Roosevelt, had much to say about the benefits of travels.
Jason wrote: "Jill wrote: "Taft had promised TR that he would make no decisions without considering "what his predecessor would have done under the same circumstances" (pg. 181). Did he break that promise? Altho..."My husband talks a lot about the hips as a hockey coach. Basically, if you can get the defender to turn his hips in the direction he/she thinks you're going to go, then change direction quickly (using your hips), the defender will have to go all the way around to catch you. I liked the references to TR's hips, because I interpreted it to mean the way he was moving, and he was committed.
I also really liked this chapter - if you change the names of the politicians, I think much of it could have been written today.I'm thankful to TR and Pinchot for our National Parks.
I'm also getting an education on political maneuvering. It reinforces my plan to never run for political office.
Mary wrote: "Another great chapter in this book. I am learning so much, and again am struck how history repeats itself. Taft complained that the progressives in Congress were determined to "defeat anything that..."Why do politicians lie or try to cover up? When they get caught, it makes it so much worse and the pain / denials / arguments last so much longer. If they'd just tell us what they did and why, I think it would blow over a lot faster than if they're embarrassed by it. Also, if it's going to embarrass you if you get caught, why do it in the first place?
Robyn wrote: "Mary wrote: "Another great chapter in this book. I am learning so much, and again am struck how history repeats itself. Taft complained that the progressives in Congress were determined to "defeat ..."Some people just lie as a way of life - if you don't accept that (not to be too partisan) remember the various Republican debates year to date.
You'll never find a politician who will say "I voted for this because the lobbyist would give my brother at 6 figure job if I did"!!! So they tell a less virulent lie to cover their tracks. I think the thing that puts me off more than the lies is that cliché "What I said was taken out of context". Try telling that to the people of WV and Kentucky when Hillary Clinton said"We are going to put a bunch of coal miners out of work". Please explain how that can be taken out of context!!!! Politicians treat the voters with disdain and obviously think we are stupid.
Another very interesting chapter. I agree with you, Jill. I just roll my eyes when I hear any politician say their comment was taken out of context. Oftentimes there is no other way to interpret what they said.Compared to previous chapters, I felt that Taft was acting more like a President, which is not saying much. Overall, I still don't think he wanted to be President, but at least in this chapter he came across as a little presidential.
I had to smile at the last section that took place in the little insignificant town on the border of Kansas, Osawatomie. It is where my best friend grew up and her family still lives.
I was surprize that Taft tried to hide the truth and then lied about doing it. As a lawyer and future Supreme Court Judge I would think he would be honest about his actions. Perhaps it fits the old saying about power and corruption.On page 192, the author writes that prosperity would remember Taft as as one of the least effective presidents in American history. While I don't think of Taft as a good president I don't think of him as one of the worst. I would not put him on my list of the bottom ten.
Wikipedia has a link to several rankings of presidents and Taft is generally in the middle to lower third. Rankings
I really like chapter 8 a lot. We read about TR and his conservation efforts. It’s what I know about TR the most. The forest protection was of interest to me and how many forests were being protected due to TR and Pinchot. Page 175. Vincent makes good points in his post about this. I am grateful to TR and Pinchot for our National Forests and his conservation efforts. On page 180, Pinchot and TR’s objective was to conserve and preserve natural resources for the people by protecting them from corporate exploitation. Conservation and environmentalism are progressive issues and conservatives opposed it.I have really enjoyed the rule changes and congressional dealings. How the progressives were making headway and Taft stood with the standpatters and was on the wrong side. Taft was a good hearted man but his heart was not in the presidency. He was more suited for the Supreme Court a position he really wanted.
I really enjoyed reading about how the Progressives especially Norris worked to loosen the grip of power of Speaker Cannon. Michael did an excellent job on portraying this and making it such interesting reading. Norris was against the power of Cannon and was able to take away his control. This was fascinating reading.
Mary wrote: "Another great chapter in this book. I am learning so much, and again am struck how history repeats itself. Taft complained that the progressives in Congress were determined to "defeat anything that..."Exactly!!! signing onto Mary post. I also think that Taft took to many things to heart which is a big mistake. I think that if your going to work in government you need to have a thicker skin. And just because someone is nice to you doesn't mean they have your back "coughs" Aldrich.
Another problem I saw with Taft that he was so busy trying to run away from TR legacy that he was ruining his own. I get that to some extent. But I think he lost sight of the fact that he could build on TR legacy and make a name for himself.
Jim wrote: "I was surprize that Taft tried to hide the truth and then lied about doing it. As a lawyer and future Supreme Court Judge I would think he would be honest about his actions. Perhaps it fits the old..."Thanks for the rankings link.
So I would just say that none of the polls referenced asked about effectiveness - which is far from best or worst - Richard Nixon was very effective but very far from best or good even having caused one of the great non-war constitutional crisis of our time.
Most interesting in the link is the Rasmussen poll which indicates both Andrew & Lyndon Johnson as equally favorable and Lyndon as more unfavorable. For the unfavorable I would credit the recentness of the Vietnam War. For the favorable I wonder what the geographic makeup was of that result. Was Andrew Johnson better appreciated in the South? I would be curious is anyone has any information about this.
Thanks again for the link
For the week of May 30th through June 5th, we are reading Chapter Eight of Unreasonable Men: Theodore Roosevelt and the Republican Rebels who Created Progressive Politics by Michael Wolraich.
The eighth week's reading assignment is:
Week Eight - May 30th - June 5th
Chapter Eight - The Insurgency - (pages 175 - 202)
We will open up a thread for each week's reading. Please make sure to post in the particular thread dedicated to those specific chapters and page numbers to avoid spoilers. We will also open up supplemental threads as we did for other spotlighted books.
This book was kicked off on April 11th. It is never too late to start a book here at the History Book Club.
We look forward to your participation. Amazon, Barnes and Noble and other noted on line booksellers do have copies of the book and shipment can be expedited. The book can also be obtained easily at your local library, local bookstore or on your Kindle. This weekly thread will be opened up today (sorry but away on travel).
There is no rush and we are thrilled to have you join us. It is never too late to get started and/or to post.
Bentley will be moderating this discussion and Assisting Moderators Teri, Jill, Bryan, and Samanta will be backups.
The author Michael Wolraich will also be actively participating in the moderation with Bentley. We welcome him to the discussion.
Welcome,
~Bentley
TO ALWAYS SEE ALL WEEKS' THREADS SELECT VIEW ALL
REMEMBER NO SPOILERS ON THE WEEKLY NON SPOILER THREADS - ON EACH WEEKLY NON SPOILER THREAD - WE ONLY DISCUSS THE PAGES ASSIGNED OR THE PAGES WHICH WERE COVERED IN PREVIOUS WEEKS. IF YOU GO AHEAD OR WANT TO ENGAGE IN MORE EXPANSIVE DISCUSSION - POST THOSE COMMENTS IN ONE OF THE SPOILER THREADS. THESE CHAPTERS HAVE A LOT OF INFORMATION SO WHEN IN DOUBT CHECK WITH THE CHAPTER OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY TO RECALL WHETHER YOUR COMMENTS ARE ASSIGNMENT SPECIFIC. EXAMPLES OF SPOILER THREADS ARE THE GLOSSARY, THE BIBLIOGRAPHY, THE INTRODUCTION AND THE BOOK AS A WHOLE THREADS.
Notes:
It is always a tremendous help when you quote specifically from the book itself and reference the chapter and page numbers when responding. The text itself helps folks know what you are referencing and makes things clear.
Citations:
If an author or book is mentioned other than the book and author being discussed, citations must be included according to our guidelines. Also, when citing other sources, please provide credit where credit is due and/or the link. There is no need to re-cite the author and the book we are discussing however.
If you need help - here is a thread called the Mechanics of the Board which will show you how:
http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/2...
Also the citation thread:
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
Introduction Thread:
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
Table of Contents and Syllabus
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
Glossary
Remember there is a glossary thread where ancillary information is placed by the moderator. This is also a thread where additional information can be placed by the group members regarding the subject matter being discussed.
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
Bibliography
There is a Bibliography where books cited in the text are posted with proper citations and reviews. We also post the books that the author used in his research or in his notes. Please also feel free to add to the Bibliography thread any related books, etc with proper citations. No self promotion, please. We will be adding to this thread as we read along.
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
Book as a Whole and Final Thoughts - SPOILER THREAD
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
Directions on how to participate in a book offer and how to follow the t's and c's - Unreasonable Men - What Do I Do Next?
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...