“I'm still reading... but this book is weird. ‘The Forgotten Man’ is FULL of errors, bad grammar and misused words. If a paragraph isn’t itself a non sequitur, it will contain at least one completely irrelevant sentence.I got so frustrated reading what felt like a high school airhead’s unedited research project that I started breezing through the pages. The weird thing is it became slightly coherent when I stepped back and quit diligently reading every sentence.How can I possibly trust the content of a book that is so poorly written? The presentation is clumsy at best and inaccurate or distorted at worst. Random insignificant and unsubstantiated quotes are prevalent. There is a Bibliographic notes section at the back of the book that mentions sources, but quotes throughout the book are without context and are not tied to specific sources.How did this book get past editing and make it to print? Seriously. It has a compelling title and an attractive cover. I bought the book after seeing the author interviewed on Charlie Rose. Among the rave reviews are obvious fragments of reviews taken out of context… reminiscent of a Fox News segment. “Well written and stimulating” ~ The Wall Street Journal (Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal). The book is published by Rupert Murdoch’s HarperCollins Publishers. Please don’t make me a conspiracy theorist, but that does explain a complete lack of quality and credibility that only Rupert Murdoch’s ‘The Weekly Standard’ could love.My only conclusion has to be that the target and receiving audience is the far right fringe who are not concerned about quality and accuracy, but I’ll offer the benefit of the doubt and assume adoring readers are those who picked up the gist of the book from a cursory skimming.This is the second worst book I’ve ever read. What a piece of irrelevance and a waste of my time. Please DO NOT buy this book.I’m a nice guy in real life so I’ll probably get embarrassed and delete this comment later, but I’m mad right now.”
