5 comments about Worse Than Watergate: The Secret Presidency of George W. Bush.

1. This book is a bit dated as it was originally written before the 2004 elections but it has been updated a bit past that point so it still has relevancy today. Any impeachment proceedings against Bush and Cheney and their minions should use this book for talking points. Mr. Dean points out all the horrific and illegal things this White House has done that are far and above what President Nixon ever did. It also makes the "impeachment" of Bill Clinton look even sillier than the total farce it was. These two (and others in the administration) should be in jail.



2. Worse Than Watergate by John Dean is worth reading just because of the title and who he is. John Dean, counsel to the Nixon White House, says that the Bush/Cheney White House is "worse than Watergate" -- that is like Jesse Ventura calling someone an obnoxious loudmouth! The book was published in 2004, ahead of the presidential election, so by the time I found it on the bargain table, it was somewhat dated. However, Bush/Cheney are STILL in power, and while the country has largely turned against them because of the war in Iraq and the slumping economy, Dean's real case against them describes the more subtle ways that the Bush II administration has weakened our democracy.
   
   The main beef that Dean has with Bush and Cheney is their secrecy. True, this is definitely a politically motivated treatise written by neither a scholar nor journalist, but it is also true that Dean has researched his topic well and that he has some first-hand experience in the matter of damage caused by a secretive executive branch. Worse Than Watergate is not going to sway Bush supporters -- if they haven't lost their confidence in his leadership by now, they are never going to budge. But, Dean has an interesting perspective, and if you are capable of separating the facts from the commentary, this short book is definitely worth the read.



3. This book is a well researched and documented examination of the excesses of the Bush/Cheney presidency and how this came to be. In the book, Dean looks at the issues of secrecy within the White House, lying and dirty tricks. And, if there is anyone, anywhere who knows more about this subject I would love to see who they are.
   
   Dean does a wonderful job of comparing and contrasting the current regime with the Nixon presidency and writes in a clear, concise and easy to read manner. I look forward to reading his other 2 books, as to learn more about what has gone wrong with the current Republican Party.
   
   This is a must read for any American who wants to see this country remain free!



4. The first in a trilogy of books by former Nixon counsel, John Dean, "Worse Than Watergate - The Secret Presidency of George W. Bush" is a must read book for every American today who wants to understand the mechanics at work in the current administration. Mr. Dean, a life-long Republican and a Washington insider for most of his long career, is fully qualified to delve into the inner workings of the White House. It was John Dean who had gone to President Richard Nixon and advised him that the activities surrounding the watergate activities were illegal and that they should be stopped. When Nixon refused to do so, Dean went to the authorities and turned himself in. It was Dean's testimony that ultimately led to the investigations and the resignation of Richard Nixon from office. It is with this insight and perspective that Dean examines the current Bush administration and draws a comparison between them.
   
   The contents of this book are very well researched and presented in a clear, concise and non-inflammatory manner. This is not a book based on character assassination or slander. Rather, what you will find are coherent and publicly available facts outlining the activities of the Bush administration. Dean begins by drawing the comparison between the Nixon administration and the Bush administration by showing the similarities in patterns of behavior and policies. He then begins to unfold in a methodical fashion how the Bush administration has, from day one, systematically engaged in a campaign of stone walling and secret agendas designed to keep information away from the public eye. The hidden agendas and obsessive secrecy employed by this administration are exposed for examination. Some of the activities revealed are downright shocking and disturbing to say the least. For those who are skeptical of the contents of the book, almost every sentence in the book is footnoted and referenced back to the source material from where the information came. So it is extremely easy to check and verify if the information is accurate.
   
   The book is well paced and easy to read and engaging which makes for a very quick read. Unfortunately, the information contained within it's pages is quite disturbing. Nevertheless, it is information that all Americans should be aware of no matter how unpleasant it might be. The Bush administration has done an excellent job of sweeping important facts under the rug and out of sight and this book contains very critical information that should be understood by the electorate. President Bush, as Nixon, has operated outside and above the law and has pursued an agenda that has thrust this country into a diabolical war that is now pushing a price tag of almost $600 billion with no signs of stopping. Dean makes it very clear that the purpose of his book is to educate the population and to make it clear that President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney should be impeached for their willful misconduct, outright lies, and obsessive secret agenda that has now attacked the very foundations of our democracy and civil liberties.



5. If there was any question or doubt that George W. Bush and Dick Cheney were and are sleaze-ball gangsters, you the doubter, will abandon your doubts once you read this book. They are truly frightening men, without morals and without conscience. Yes, they and all they have done is much worse than Watergate.

5 comments about Prison Writings: My Life Is My Sun Dance.

1. 
   This book, along with almost 50 fawning reviews, merely illustrates the effectiveness of propaganda in spreading mass ignorance. The reviewers are so sure that Peltier is innocent that the facts don't seem to matter. They would just get in the way, as in Peltier bragging about shooting a man in the head who was begging for his life (heard by four others), as in 15 federal judges affirming the original conviction (not one dissenter), and as in incontrovertible evidence that linked Peltier's rifle to the crime scene. I doubt these people are even aware that six months before he murdered two injured and helpless Federal Agents, Peltier put a gun in AIM member Anna Mae Aquash's mouth while interrogating her about being an informant. AIM leaders later had her executed (gun to the head again) partly because she was one of the four who heard Peltier's boast. Anna Mae knew too much.
   
   Yes, ignorance is truly bliss, but truth can cure ignorance. If you want to discover the truth about what happened that day, read American Indian Mafia.



2. The rhetoric of the other reviews aside, Prison Writings would make for a compelling story had Peltier included some truth to support his allegations surrounding the events of June 26, 1975 on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, South Dakota.
   
   By way of a brief background, Peltier was represented by capable and experienced counsel and during his trial the jury heard that FBI agents Jack Coler and Ron Williams were following who they thought was another wanted person. They actually followed Peltier and two teenagers who began shooting at the agents who were then trapped and exposed in an open area. Peltier was joined by several others, including Dino Butler and Robert Robideau who also fired on the agents from another direction. Both Coler and Williams were severely wounded and unable to defend themselves. Peltier's jury heard that Peltier, Robideau and Butler went down to the wounded agents and shot them both in the face at point-blank range with a high powered rife. The jury believed the testimony they heard and Peltier was convicted for, among other things, aiding and abetting and sentenced to two consecutive life sentences. He later received an additional seven year consecutive sentence for an armed escape from Lompoc federal penitentiary. (In a separate and earlier trial, Dino Butler and Robert Robideau were acquitted of the murders. However, this review relates specifically to how Peltier portrays the facts surrounding these events in Prison Writings. There is much more to the entire saga.)
   
   It's important to place Prison Writings in its proper chronological context. Prison Writings was published in 1999. An important related book touted by Peltier and the Leonard Peltier Defense Committee (LPDC) that "immortalizes Leonard Peltier," In The Spirit of Crazy Horse (ITSOCH) by Peter Matthiessen was first published in 1983 and in 1992. A film, Incident at Oglala (Incident), narrated by Robert Redford was released in 1992. Collectively, these sources, in addition to the many public statements made by Peltier, Butler and Robideau, demonstrate that Peltier is not only fabricating the history of his own case but knowingly lies about certain events.
   
   There are many more, but for example:
   
   The scene:
   Peltier initially claimed he was in the AIM camp to the south of the Jumping Bull property, heard shots, responded and "I fired off a few shots above their heads, trying not to hit anything (p.125)." And also "I didn't see their agents die, had no hand in it..." (p.127). Yet in a CNN interview in October, 1999 Peltier admitted being there and told interviewer Mark Potter "I don't know, just two people laying there. I mean, the car door--the car door open and stuff."
   
   The alibi:
   For the better part of nearly two decades Peltier had offered only one alibi about who was responsible for the final killing shots to the agents' faces. He claimed that someone they all knew but would not identify (Mr. X), had driven to the reservation that day in a red pickup truck to deliver dynamite and that it was Mr. X who engaged the agents initially and then, once wounded and unable to defend themselves, killed the agents and drove off. In Incident Robideau is filmed pointing to the area where Mr. X murdered the agents and drove off in the red pickup truck. This claim was so far-fetched that not even Peltier's trial lawyers wanted to go near it, but they did their best to create confusion with the jury over the alleged red pickup truck. Matthiessen, although skeptical himself, spent a great deal of time on Mr. X in ITSOCH. However, in a 1995 interview with News from Indian Country, one of the three participants, Dino Butler, publicly said that the Mr. X story was a lie; "Well, there is no Mr. X. There was no man coming to our camp that day bringing dynamite." "To create this lie to show that someone else pulled the trigger." " That is totally false. Totally untrue. That never happened."
   
   It should come as no surprise that Mr. X. and the red pickup are never mentioned in Prison Writings.
   
   Aiding and abetting:
   Peltier tries to convince the reader that the "vague crime of aiding and abetting" (p162) was somehow later added to the charge of murdering the agents. Yet, during one of the many appeals (one dealing with this specific issue in 1993), the appeals court stated that "Peltier's arguments fail because their underlying premises are fatally flawed. (A) the government tried the case on the alternative theories; it asserted that Peltier personally killed the agents at point blank range, but that if he had not done so, then he was equally guilty of the murder as an aider and abettor."
   
   Preplanned assault:
   Peltier lays the groundwork for claiming that according to a document obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, the government "...had been gathering in the area for a preplanned paramilitary assault on the Pine Ridge reservation," (p.129) comprised of "...dozens, maybe hundreds..." (p.127) of law-enforcement personnel. The document (dated April 24, 1975) he refers to (the noted "sanctioned memo") says nothing of the kind and related to the 1973 takeover by AIM of Wounded Knee. Ironically this memo was still being circulated around FBI headquarters in Washington D.C. even after the murders of agents Coler and Williams with a date at the bottom of the memo of August 11, 1975. This memo is not even in the same universe as Peltier claims. This assertion was so outrageous even Matthiessen shied away from it by claiming after all his research that the initial shooting at the agents was spontaneous, neither a pre-planned government event nor premeditated ambush of the two agents. "...if there is another persuasive explanation of the location and position of their cars, I cannot find it." (ITSOCH p.544).
   
   Further, it was well documented that when the agents were first pinned down in the open field, Agent Williams made desperate calls for help and assistance over his FBI radio. These transmissions were overheard by a number of individuals who all confirmed how quickly the shooting started, and ended, and that the nearest agent was about twelve miles away. That FBI agent, Gary Adams, responded with a BIA officer, the first two to even reach close to the scene. They were also shot at and had to back away to Highway 18 and await more assistance. In the meantime, Coler and Williams were murdered and Peltier and the others escaped.
   
   Robideau:
   Robert Robideau who has been assimilated and rejected by the Peltier organization several times over the years has made damning admissions. Robideau stated publicly on numerous occasions, and in emails to this reviewer, that he's the one who actually killed the agents:
   
   "As far as I have ever been concerned the killing of the agents was justified..." "They were shot in the head at close range..." "I have no remorse..." "I am "Mr X" (which is no lie) and I did kill them with honor befitting a warrior, but they died like worms." "I thought I already told you that I killed the agents."
   
   Of course Robideau has the constitutional protection against double-jeopardy, but this reviewer believes he is even too much of a coward to shoot two severely wounded and incapacitated human beings. But whether he killed the agents himself is immaterial; the Peltier jury heard and accepted the testimony that the three older Indians, Robideau, Butler and Peltier went down to the wounded agents and murdered them by shooting them both in the face.
   
   Of course, Prison Writings suggests none of this but hides behind fabrications and outright lies to further the folklore surrounding Peltier and perpetuating The Myth.
   
   What it does do however is firmly establish that Peltier did not remove himself from the scene of the crime.
   
   Prison Writings is self-serving drivel and should not be used to document in any fashion what happened that June day at Pine Ridge. Anyone interested in going beyond The Myth should spend some time reviewing the very detailed appeals that cover every aspect of this case.
   
   [...]



3. After all is said and done, just read the thousands of pages that the U.S. government, through the FBI, the U.S. Attorney's office and court records, was forced to release about this case. It is their own words about their own deliberate withholding of evidence, fabrication of evidence, deliberate perjured testimony and numerous other violations of U.S. law, rules of evidence, and other assorted felonies.



4. Leonard Peltier, United States Prisoner 89637-132, has been imprisoned since 1977 for the deaths of two FBI agents on the Pine Ridge Reservation of the Lakota Indians during the 1973 siege at Wounded Knee, South Dakota. Most likely the scapegoat for the deaths during a blundered surveillance attempt, Peltier has been a cause celeb during the final throws of every president since Jimmy Carter as many supporters - including the U.S. Prosecutor that put him in jail in the first place - come together to call for his parden.
   
   There are other sources for an in-depth understanding of the events that led to his imprisonment such as Peter Mathiesson's *In the Spirit of Crazy Horse* and the Robert Redford film *Incident at Oglala*. But Prison Writings is a must read in any study of not only the Wounded Knee incident, but the American Indian Movement as a whole and native issues throughout the country.
   
   This book weaves Peltier's life as a prisoner in the U.S. prison system with his account of the events of 1973 and his views on the state of affairs for Native Americans as a whole. Peltier's life evolved from an aimless youth on the reservation to a political activist, and at times it seems that his life sentence is a natural extension of this progression - as if his destiny was to suffer for the cause.
   
   When you look at the evidence of all that transpired at Wounded Knee in 1973 and the years that followed, including what happened to other activists such as Annie Mae Aquash, and the now revealed manipulation of evidence by the FBI and the all-out war against Native American activism in the 1970s, Leonard Peltier's *Prison Writings* become somewhat of a manifesto and call for a better future.
   
   >>>>>>><<<<<<<
   
   A Guide to my Book Rating System:
   
   1 star = The wood pulp would have been better utilized as toilet paper.
   2 stars = Don't bother, clean your bathroom instead.
   3 stars = Wasn't a waste of time, but it was time wasted.
   4 stars = Good book, but not life altering.
   5 stars = This book changed my world in at least some small way.



5. This is a true story of an Indian who is in prison
   just because he's an Indian. I real eye opener and
   interesting facts about the Indians here today.

5 comments about Master of the Senate: The Years of Lyndon Johnson.

1. I had read Robert Caro's book on Robert Moses, and I found Master of the Senate to be an equally well-written and insightful read about an even more complicated figure. Readers get a real sense of the dark character of Lyndon Johnson. The book also offers a revealing view of the inner workings of the U.S. Senate. His portraits of Richard Russell and Sam Rayburn are particularly poignant. This book is highly recommended for anyone interested in 20th-century U.S. history, and for anyone who enjoys monumental biographies.



2. Anyone know? This is a masterful book series. The one on LBJ's presidency should be the best.



3. Despite what you think of LBJ, and I don't think much of him, Robert Caro's series on Johnson far surpasses any other books that have come before or after on Lyndon Johnson. In all three of Caro's volumes, he includes mini biographies of important people in Lyndon's life. In this volume, Senator Richard Russell, jr. of Georgia is given his due, and his importance as friend and adviser to LBJ. Also, the first 100 pages include a history of the US senate that could stand alone as a book unto itself. I can't wait for Caro's fourth volume, alas it probably won't be out for another five years.



4. Caro is a master writer. I found his book 'The Power Broker' about Robert Moses easily one of my top ten reads of all time, five star all the way. Johnson to me was not quite as interesting, but nevertheless this is a top notch book showing how Johnson came into the Senate and transformed it. No matter what one thinks of Johnson, if one is a student of American politics, this is a worthwhile book as it shows the influence of one man and what can be done. He was no saint, but he did manage to get things done. I am slowly working my way through it, it's been about 2 years, I keep picking it up and putting it down, but learn something every time.



5. I used to worry Robert Caro wouldn't live long enough to complete his epic biographical history on Lyndon Johnson. Now, 25 years after the first volume, I worry I won't live long enough to read it all.
   
   Published in 2002 and still as of now Caro's latest installment, "Master Of The Senate" weighs in at close to 1,100 pages. It details Johnson's time in the Senate, where he rose to become the Majority Leader. Caro spends 100 pages explaining how the Senate was designed and operated as something of a brake on populist excitability, a vessel for cooling passions. A sort of sluggishness evolved, Caro explains, until the guy with ambition from Texas arrived and changed everything by smashing tradition to bits.
   
   Caro's overriding distaste for Johnson, clear especially in "Means Of Ascent", remains in force here, but another strain emerges, too, of Johnson the difference maker, the guy who got things done. You almost might see him, flaws and all, as a kind of archetypal American in his cussed indomitability, brutish, charming, needfully effective.
   
   When LBJ's mother asks about Adlai Stevenson, the Democrat who twice ran for President in the 1950s, you can't help but chuckle at his reply: "He's a nice fellow, Mother, but he won't make it 'cause he's got too much lace on his drawers."
   
   Better than "Means To Ascent" but not the classic that "Path To Power" was, "Master Of The Senate" suffers from things that make Caro such a great writer, like his ability to draw up seemingly endless detail and find a coherent whole. He can't stop writing about a handful of topics. Each time he goes back to the well he draws up something different, but it's too often the same well.
   
   Caro believes Johnson was the difference maker in making civil rights happen, even though he championed a watered-down version, because he was the only man who could push civil rights through the Senate and its stubborn Southern wing. It's a debatable point, especially since the force of change was already there, Johnson or no.
   
   More problematic for me was the book's unrelenting focus in its second half on the 1957 Civil Rights Act, which ultimately accomplished little, and on Johnson's bid for the 1956 Democratic presidential nomination, which he didn't get and wouldn't have mattered if he had. So much time is spent here that Caro is left to sum up the three remaining years of Johnson's Senate career after the Civil Rights Act's passage in less than 30 pages.
   
   One great thing about "Master Of The Senate" is Caro's articulation of Johnson's ambition as both poison and antidote for the Senate, in how he worked his fellow senators, racist zealots like Richard Russell and liberal lions like Hubert Humphrey, to get what he wanted.
   
   Johnson may have been one of the toughest figures ever to take control of our tough nation. Tough enough, in fact, that I think he'd even like Caro's books about him, warts and all. If one man's life was ever a testament to the power of one's own will, it was Johnson's, and in Caro that will to power has an able chronicler.

5 comments about The Dark Side of Camelot.

1. Given the obvious falsehood of the Clinton era nonsense that personal morality is irrelevant to the public figure, we now need to start in on the fools who, with hubris and no qualms about bald-faced lying to the American public, we need to start revising our views of the men REALLY responsible for mutilating the constitution in favor of ego and a misguided sense that they knew better than the founding fathers, instead of just second tier types like JFK, academicians should start on the (attempted) court packing, congenital liar, and true war monger F.D.R (or the brain dead, subservient socialist mouthpiece Woodrow Wilson, and his Edgar Bergan, Col. House.) One chapter on what could have happened if F.D.R had died before replacing Socialist Henry Wallace during his last, fourth,ego-trip term-perhaps Henry Dexter White as Secretary of State and Alger Hiss as Secretary of Defense should make it obvious what a dangerous, naive fool F.D.R was. It COULD have been even worse than that, instead of "just" knowing every secret communication out of F.D.R's White House sieve, Stalin could have actually RUN the damn thing personally. Given what F.D.R gave Stalin at Yalta, what would Wallace have given him? All of Western Europe, too, or just Germany,France and England?



2. Seymour Hersh, the man according to whom we have to thank for the Church Commission (which led to idiotic government intelligence "reforms" that, in turn, contributed to the intelligence failures that permitted 9-11), presents his best shot in this book at smearing the Kennedy clan. John especially, but also Joe and even to a certain extent Bobby. In most of the book, he succeeds in this task only to the extent we can trust mobsters, convicted felons, former madams, self-professed ex-lovers, hustlers, disgruntled employees and bankrupt, disbarred attorneys to tell us the truth.
   
   However, Mr. Hersh does present some very compelling testimonies from JFK's secret service agents, who describe JFK's White House adolescent hijinks in rhyparographic detail. Believe me, that section alone (pp 226-246) is enough to take the shine off Camelot -- permanently.
   
   Hersh is perplexing. He has impeccable anti-American and Democratic Party credentials, yet he savages JFK, a fellow Democrat, in a way that no one had done before, or in the eleven years since the book was published. Why? I can only conclude that Hersh's anger stems from his view that JFK was responsible for Vietnam. Hersh addresses Vietnam in the last two chapters of the book, and although these chapters are better sourced than some of the more salacious sections, the chapters seem disjointed, meandering, and tied together only by rage towards JFK.



3. Normally I would not review an 11-year-old book, but as it presents a distorted view of JFK to say the least, and is still in print in 2008, here goes.
   
   Mr. Hersh has obliged his corporate and government sponsors with a double-barreled hit. First, he produced a best-seller, and second, he produced a JFK biography sure to please both the corporates and their government cronies.
   
   Mr. Hersh reveals JFK's sexual escapades in great length and detail. I estimate that at least 25% of the book is spent on this topic. This is fair enough, since JFK apparently spent the same percentage of his time pursuing sexual adventures. Mr. Hersh also presents much evidence backing claims of JFK's health problems, including frequent doses of various medications that kept him going. The early chapters tell some interesting stories about JFK's father, Joseph, and other family members including JFK's maternal grandfather, John F. "Honey Fitz" Fitzgerald.
   
   Mr. Hersh presents some interesting insights into crucial moments in JFK's presidency. The Bay of Pigs, the Berlin crisis, the Cuba missile crisis, plots to assassinate Fidel Castro, and the escalation of US involvement in Vietnam are dealt with in detail. Mr. Hersh contradicts accounts of these events written by close Kennedy associates, Ted Sorensen in particular. Mr. Hersh reveals a secretive, inexperienced, power-hungry and vindictive President who trusted only one man other than himself, his brother Robert. There does seem to be some truth to Hersh's contradictory accounts, but there also seems to be an underlying motivation behind this book, and this is the promotion of an official version of JFK and his presidency that focuses on JFK's personal weaknesses, presents CIA in a favorable light, and either lies about important events, or omits them entirely.
   
   Did you know, for example, that the Bay of Pigs fiasco was entirely JFK's fault? Did you know that JFK and RFK micro-managed plots involving the Mafia to kill Castro, and that the Vietnam War is JFK's legacy, not something he would have ended? With that knowledge, surely you should also learn about JFK's firing of Allan Dulles (later appointed to the Warren Commission), General Cabell and Richard Bissell? Sorry, that's not in the official story. Furthermore, since JFK was obviously so much at odds with CIA, surely you should read about JFK's threats to disband CIA? Sorry again.
   
   I quote from the "Author's Note" at the beginning of the book:
   
   "It [this book] tells of otherwise strong and self-reliant men and women
   who were awed and seduced by Kennedy's magnetism, and who competed with
   one another to please the most charismatic leader in our nation's history.
   Many are still blinded today.
   
   In writing this book, my hope is that I have been able to help the nation
   reclaim some of its history."
   
   Some very select and well chosen bits of its history, perhaps, but nothing that really matters, like who was responsible for JFK's assassination. Mr. Hersh is not one to talk about being "blinded", as he still professes to believe the official Lee Harvey Oswald "lone nut assassin" myth. Among the few remaining adherents to the myth are mainstream corporate media types like Mr. Hersh, anyone in government, and current and former intelligence agency employees who don't want to lose their security clearances or be sentenced to "dine alone". John Loftus and Tennent H. "Pete" Bagley are two examples of the latter.
   
   Despite this best-selling book and others written with the same intent, most of the public continue to admire JFK despite knowing that he was a highly flawed human being. Most people also disbelieve the official lone-nut assassin myths about JFK and RFK. To remove the spell of Mr. Hersh's quote above, I'll close with a quote from St. John Hunt (source: a Rolling Stone article you can easily find), author of "The Last Confessions of E. Howard Hunt":
   
   "Actually, there were probably dozens of plots to kill Kennedy, because everybody hated Kennedy but the public."
   
   Edit June 22, 2008: There is a new book that anyone with an interest in JFK should read: JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters. In particular, it puts paid to Hersh's contention that Vietnam must be considered as part of the Kennedy legacy.



4. Mr. Hersh paints a convincing picture of JFK as an extremely hard working, ambitious man who was party to a myriad of addictions including painkillers and sex. I actually found the early sections of the book which deal primarily with his father Joe Kennedy to be insightful into the kind of environment he grew up in and undoubtably led to his immoral nature. Where Hersh is on weaker ground is when he tries to psychoanalyze JFK. He attempts to connect all of Kennedy's personal issues to decisions made about international politics, a hazardous course. I think Hersh was too close to Kennedy and his sense of profound disappointment as well as his breathy, rumormonger style of writing sometimes hurts his credibility which is unforunate because I think the author wrote a thought provoking, intelligent book



5. Legend and hero are the words most of us learn in school to apply to John F. Kennedy. We usually tend to see him only in his media and photographic image, but Seymour Hersh portrays him here as being a man with an abundant set of flaws and characteristics. Most likely, although I grant that not everything the author says can be definitively proven, Hersh's depiction of JFK is far closer to that of the real person than the one we see gazing down upon us in posters. Of course, The Dark Side of Camelot is about a whole lot more than the 35th President. We find out all manner of fact and rumor concerning his grandfather, Honey Fitz, his father, and the rest of his family; not to mention Richard Nixon and an array of women who are too numerous to name here. Kennedy was the quintessential high status male, and, intrinsic to his status, were a great many politically incorrect features that are fun to read about (while still being informative in regards to the leader and his times).

5 comments about The Motorcycle Diaries (Movie Tie-in Edition) : Notes on a Latin American Journey.

1. I understand that he was an important historical figure but his adolescent writings are pretty uninteresting.
   I much preferred the movie over the book.



2. Che Guevara... Whether you respect him or not there is absolutely no denying the fact that he had a profound impact on the history of Central America and the Caribbean. This book is plainly and simply about a young man on a journey to become the person everyone knows in history. He sets out as a college student in his early twenties on the motorcycle La Poderosa II with Alberto Granado. When he returns a year later he has aged a hundred years. It is almost as though he has become a different person.
   
   On his journey he saw the impoverished and the ignored. He saw indifference and hate. He saw racism and inequality... especially inequality.
   
   This journey across the poor and rich regions of Latin America made Ernesto Che Guevara exactly who he was. In his travels he found he could not understand why some should have more than others. His communist views developed from seeing the unfair treatment of the poor. He was ready, by the end, to do whatever it took to win equality for all: even fight. As he said at the end of his book: "I feel my nostrils dilate, savoring the acrid smell of gunpowder and blood. The enemy's death; I steel my body, ready to do battle, and prepare myself to be a sacred space within which the bestial howl of the triumphant proletariat can resound with new energy and new hope."
   
   Although a few things are lost to us English speakers through the translation and Argentine dialect this is a book which is full of rich detail and of deep internal struggle. This book was written in 1952, but edited and assembled much later. This causes some very Communist views to appear that were clearly added well after the original writings.
   Still this is a great read to see the mind of a genius in a time when the world was still reeling from the shock of a great world war and gearing up for the middle of the cold war. Che Guevara would go on in life to befriend Fidel Castro and be his right hand man in the Communist regime over Cuba. Che Guevara, whether you like him or not, is undoubtedly one of the greatest and most influential people in history.



3. If this book were written by any other person, I'd give it 2 Stars. But because it's by Che, you at least get some insights into him, and that makes it a 3.
   
   This was a turning point adventure for Che; it's the trip that turned him from curious medical student to doing down the path of revolutionary. For that alone, it's worth the read.
   
   But if you're looking for an even better book about Che, and with all the adventure, get "Chasing Che" by Patrick Symms. It's an excellent read.
   
   And if you're looking for a motorcycle adventure book, look no further than One-Man Caravan by Robert Fulton. Imagine traveling around the WORLD on a motorcycle BACK IN 1932. Complete with pictures, drawings and great writing ... simply a masterpiece within the genre.
   
   Back to Motorcycle Diaries ... I think this book could have been so much more. Che was a good writer, but he stumbles on himself a lot. And, because he actually wrote this book AFTER the adventure was over, it feels like there is a lot of glossing over and "story fill" that robs it of the spontaneity it could have had.
   
   Still, if you're into Che, it's probably on the "must read" list.



4. I'm so pleased that you had this earlier English translation of The Motorcycle Diaries and that it arrived in time for my Spanish class presentation. I also read the newer edition that came out with the movie in 2004. Your book had a much better translation. Thanks for your help. Sometimes older books are better books.



5. Seen the movie long before the book, but this book was very interesting to see how Che's thoughts began to form before he became only known as Che. Pictures in the centre were an added bonus. It's a quick read with concise notes (they are journal notes afterall), and it gave me a greater understanding and feeling of compassion for Ernesto Guevara - someone who I didn't know a lot about and in the USA you hear about how bad he is. Good thing I live in Canada, with an open mind.

5 comments about Condi: The Life of a Steel Magnolia.

1. This book is both enjoyable to read and very informative.
   It is interesting to read how Condi's childhood, college, and time at Stanford all contributed to shaping her for her current career at the White House.



2. Whether Republican or Democrat, (or other), white or black (or other), male or female, I think every reader will find this a most interesting book about a very unique person. There were a few surprises in the book, which I had never heard from any other source. The author did a great job of tracing Condoleeza's rise from her segregated upbringing in the deep south of the 60's to her becoming Secretary of State. Great book!



3. As soon as I finished this informative biography, I instructed my both of my daughters to read it. Dr Rice is exactly the kind of role model I want for them.
   
   This is an interesting bio not only for the light it sheds on the winning of the cold war, but more so in the instruction to the pathway to success and greatness. Before I read this bio I was a fan of Dr. Rice but now she is my hero.



4. Hooray for Mary Beth Brown. It is wonderful to read a book about a person who has achieved so much without a powerful family dynasty or government entitlements behind them. The subtitle of the book is perfect. After getting to know Condi through these pages she epitomizes a steel magnolia. I was wanting to know the person Condi and I have now met her. It is amazing that a young girl from segregated Alabama became our Secretary of State, but after reading about her ancestry and the value of education in her family it is the perfect place for her to be. I appreciate the humility of Condi. She never strove for a position of power at either Stanford or in our government, yet she was chosen for these positions through her own merit. If you are looking for a rehashing of all her political achievements during her service to our country you are reading the wrong book. This is a wonderful telling of who she is as a person.



5. I was recently given the opportunity to read and review the book Condi: The Life of a Steel Magnolia by Mary Beth Brown. There are a number of things that will factor into whether you end up liking this book or not. All things considered, I ended up thinking this was around an "average" book...
   
   Contents:
   Transforming America; Entering a New World; A Strong Family Heritage; Childhood Matters; Becoming a Steel Magnolia; Not Your Average Teenager; Education Is the Way to Success; Professor Rice; Dealing with the Soviet Union; Tackling a Monstrous Deficit; Condi the Campaigner; Advising a President; The Most Powerful Woman in the World; Epilogue; Bibliography; Notes; Index; Acknowledgments; About the Author
   
   On the positive side... This book goes into a fair amount of detail about how she grew up in the segregated South, an only child who was taught that nothing should stand in her way to achieve whatever she could dream. Her ancestors placed great importance on education, and that emphasis carried down to her. As a result, she was way ahead of the curve when it came to academic achievement, regardless of color and gender. She was also well-versed in the arts, and is an accomplished pianist who still plays regularly for herself and the occasional public performance. Her Christian faith is also integral to her attitude and philosophy in life, and that's something that can't be sectioned off and dealt with as a compartment. Based on the way the author presents the material, you realize that Rice places critical importance on her relationship with God. When you're done with the book, you know that she has accomplished more in her life than any number of people combined. She truly is an example of overcoming obstacles and hurdles in life to become a success.
   
   On the negative side... You'd think that Rice has never made a mistake in her life based on the author's often gushing portrayal of her. Little if any time is spent analyzing her decisions made as "the most powerful woman in the world" in terms of foreign policy, terrorism, and other issues facing the American people both here and abroad. I almost got the impression that Rice may not necessarily be setting policy as she would have it, but rather serving the president and promoting the Administration views as a good soldier. This lack of impartial or even critical analysis taints what otherwise could be a decent biography of Rice. Without that analysis, it's hard not to view this as a rather one-sided pro-Condi book put out by people who would like to see her run for President or something.
   
   From my perspective, I learned much about Rice, and she's someone who I admire. I *do* have a hard time reconciling that view of her with the current administration she works for. If you approach the book from a purely political viewpoint, there's not much here that would satisfy you. If you're more interested in a human interest portrayal of someone who has succeeded in life, then you'll get more out of it. I would have preferred a portrayal that was more realistic, complete with flaws and mistakes. Instead, it's more of a rah-rah read that may leave you still wondering who the real Condi is...

5 comments about Locked in the Cabinet.

1. Robert Reich gives a human touch to the deliberations with high levels of government and how the president is sometimes trapped by congress and his advisors and not able to follow his compaign promises. It also presents the frustations of a cabinet secretary working to improve the staus of those working for minimal wages and all the time loosing to the desires of big business. He describes what one gives-up of himself to serve in a president's cabinet. It is very readable, much like a diary and follows the cronology of Clinton's first 4 years. Mr. Reich is also humorus and not afraid to relate his foibles as secretary of commerce. An enjoyable and informative read



2. I continue to use this book in my "Intro. to Public Policy" course. I ask my mostly first- and second-year students at the end of the semester if they like the book and if they think it is useful even though it's now almost 9 years old. They thoroughly enjoy it and appreciate gaining a better understanding of the Clinton administration and events in the 1990s that happened when they were only 6-12 years old. Highly recommend.



3. So far, I've read three other memoirs from the Clinton Administration; those of Mr. & Mrs. Clinton and Bob Rubin.
   "Locked in the Cabinet" exhibits a sharp contrast to all other three in that it is the more casual and down to earth recollection of what was happening behind the Democrat-"Putting People First" - disguise of the Clinton Administration, where, in the face of Bill Clinton's indecisiveness, some of the key cabinet members and the Federal Reserve's chief continued to put big businesses and Wall Street first, at the expense of working class America which the Labor Secretary represented. Reich describes some of his cabinet colleagues, plus the President, the First Lady and Greenspan, in an unprecedented light.
   He also well explains his ideal fresh from den being constantly challenged and often destroyed by political balance of power and reality. He does so with passion, wit, colloquialism, and the sense of forgiveness.
   As a reader in Japan where (from wive's point of view) what traditionally makes a good husband is a big bread winner who is hardly home, the detailed descriptions of the author's struggles against his family missing him badly is too alien to me. The author who held a highly respected cabinet position away from family would have made a most desirable husband in Japan.
   I would like to read how his family life developed after he was reunited. Hope he is happy in Berkeley now.



4. Reich presents insightful information in a hillarious way. By writing the book in a journal style, the reader views the 1st four years of the Clinton presidency as a hard fight for the laboring poor. One really feels as if they are in Reich's position, with his outrage, frustrations, and loneliness.



5. Reich is absolutely brilliant and this book presents a good dollop of his wisdom. Few people in politics are driven by ideals anymore, which makes Reich's laser focus on improving economic inequity all the more laudable. And doomed.
   
   In fact, this book explains a whole lot about how & why Clinton's first term of office became such a disappointment. "B" (as Reich, a longtime FoB, calls him) was elected with a mandate, he was young and energetic, he was idealistic and he was determined to improve the social disasters left by 12 years of voodoo economics. But he was also a classic Washington Outsider who did not have the requisite skills of playing Congress like a fiddle as FDR, JFK & LBJ had with their progressive terms. Consequently Clinton's agenda became a losing political football even under a majority Democratic Congress. When Congress passed back into Republican hands in 1994 (in large part due to Clinton's own fumbling) his effectiveness was cut off at the knees by Newt Gingrich and his Contract with America. From then on, B was in full-time CYA mode, relying on Dick Morris's polling of voters to decide all policy issues. The result -- and ultimately the indignity of the impeachment attempt -- are all too familiar and preordained. Alas Bill, we hardly knew thee...
   
   Reich's book is fascinating, thought provoking, brutally frank and often hilariously funny. The man is a gem -- too bad politics isn't a respectable business anymore. Or was it ever?

5 comments about Blinded by the Right: The Conscience of an Ex-Conservative.

1. I wish I had read this sooner but I had shied away from it because I figured that Mr. Brock was a David Horowitz in reverse (and we know what an opportunistic scum bag Horowitz is). But this is an important and authentic work from an insider who shows us exactly how the neo-nazi, neocon "conservatives" took over and nearly destroyed our American nation (we are a nation, not a "homeland" or "fatherland"). We must take back our country in November (we started that process in the 2006 elections) and be rid of the Republican war criminals but that is not enough: Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Tenet, Coulter/Limbaugh (Goebbels), and those already convicted (Libby, Abramoff, Delay, Cunningham, Foley, Craig, etc.) need to be brought before a duly appointed Tribunal to answer for their crimes against humanity and particularly their crimes against the American people (including our brave soldiers and my friend Pat Tillman, who they killed). Richard Clarke could be the chief witness for the prosecution. We need more jails to house the corporate crooks.
   I had the privilege of meeting Barry Goldwater and his wonderful wife Peggy when I lived in Arizona in the early 90's. Senator Goldwater was an honorable, real conservative and he was appalled by the Falwells, Robertsons, Gingriches, etc. If you consider yourself a principled conservative, you must read this book and help us remove the cancers from our society that Mr. Brock so ably describes. Through it all, I have believed there are more good people than evil people in our nation ("the better angels of our nature", as Lincoln said): some start out evil like Brock but then their human heart and conscience kicks in; let's kick out every last slime bag with an (R) by his or her name this November and rebuild our nation.



2. There isn't much I can say about this book that hasn't already been said in other favorable reviews here. All I'll add is that even if you allow for the zeal of Brock's re-converson to liberal prinicples and some bitterness towards his former conservative and neocon mentors and paymasters, there is much in this book that rings frighteningly true. Most fascinating is Brock's inside look at the anti-Clinton smear machine of which he was part - and which, no doubt, is warming up for 2008. Arm yourself with knowledge that you'll need if Hillary runs for President. Read this book.



3. In his 1950 study of the authoritarian personality, Theodor Adorno constructed a political-psychological profile of people he called "pseudo-conservatives." These were people who called themselves conservatives but in truth adhered to political agendas that betrayed the ideals of individual freedom and free markets. Pseudo-conservatives were motivated by hate, fear, and power, not the desire to conserve or guarantee liberty. A few years later, the eminent historian Richard Hofstadter appropriated Adorno's term in describing what he called "the paranoid style in American politics." In Adorno and Hofstadter's day, this paranoid style of pseudo-conservativism was still in its embryonic state, personified by the rantings of Joseph McCarthy but still far from being the game plan for the Republican Party as a whole. David Brock's Blinded by the Right chronicles how this movement slithered its way into power long before anyone had heard of Karl Rove, whose name isn't even listed in the index.
   
   Blinded by the Right amazingly combines the political history of a loathsome political movement with the personal story of a sympathetic individual who found himself at the center of that movement. Always an idealist among opportunists, Brock's entrée to conservatism was admirable enough, as he was a former Kennedy liberal who was turned off by Berkeley protest-ologists who simply shouted down their adversaries, thus betraying the cause of free speech that had galvanized the campus in the glory years of the 1960s. But those ideals quickly dissolved into an us-versus-them battle which was motivated by a hatred for liberal enemies more than anything else. Ironically, Brock and his colleagues had much more in common with late 60s revolutionaries like the Weathermen, with their constantly escalating rhetoric of destroying the establishment, and Stalinists in the Communist Party, who enforced the party line by threatening dissenters with the charge that they were helping "the other team."
   
   Blinded by the Right is an essential chronicle of a political movement and a historical era, but somehow it is even more than that. Its personal narrative of a young person's rise to power and fame, followed by descent into disillusionment and depression, is gripping enough for Hollywood. Brock came out as a homosexual while he was in college but then shoved himself back into the closet as he ascended to celebrity status on the Right, whose agenda became increasingly homophobic after the collapse of communism left them without the enemy they had depended on for so long. Brock now sees his willingness to parrot right-wing ideology as part of his attempt to fit in with the movement when he secretly knew didn't, and he sees the vitriol that he spewed in his writing as a subconscious expression of his own self-hatred. In fact, Brock offers many penetrating insights into the psychology of his right-wing former colleagues, and for the most part they appear to be a miserable bunch prone to textbook cases of projection.
   
   Brock's break from the right corresponded with his personal move toward self-acceptance. It is heroic act of liberation that sometimes made me want to stand up and cheer for him, but it was clearly a journey full of pain. His liberation proceeds in stages, with Brock initially portraying himself as a victim, and then only later coming to grips with his own complicity and eagerness to serve the movement. Changed but not bitter, Brock comes out the other side as a very wise man who can see clearly now only because he is able to accept himself, his past, and his imperfections. I hope we'll see more books like this in the future coming from the current throng of right-wingers, but I'm not holding my breath, because this required a ton of courage and compassion, and that's precisely what this movement lacks most.



4. After hearing about this book a great deal from many people, I finally had to give it a read. What I got was a mostly well written account about how Brock gave the neo-con movement exactly what they wanted in terms of what can only be called propaganda. Brock does a good job in exposing the oft-ridiculed "vast right-wing conspiracy".
   
   But it makes a boring read at times, what with long lists of people and publications. And it seems just a bit self-serving at times, like he is trying to say, "Oh, how bad I was to do all this, but I was very good at it." And, after all, he does say exactly what I, as a liberal person, want to hear about those on the right who keep insisting that people who believe like me are traitors.
   
   I respect Mr. Brocks conversion to the left, and I like his work with mediamatters.org, but I am not sure I plan to read any more of his books.



5. This book is a terrible exposure of the powers behind the (extreme) right in the US, of their methods, of their foot-folk and their `morals'.
   The powers are the fundamentalist Christian Right, extreme wealthy families and corporate interest. Those powers are firmly anchored in the Republican Party.
   Their means are disgusting smear campaigns, vulgar attacks on political opponents, totally biased reporting, in one word `whournalism'.
   Their working method are `see what you are supposed to see', `turn a blind eye to facts that do not suit your political aims' and `paper over monstrous moral wrongs in the service of the perceived morality of your cause'.
   
   Their foot-folk are members of think-tanks, media men, investigators, journalists, intelligence personnel. The author considered himself as a right-wing hit-man, profiting hugely from his totally biased or completely fabricated scribbles.
   
   This book unveils the raw selfishness, the protection of sinister (Bertrand Russell) interests (`cutting taxes to defund the left') and the blatant hypocrisy and hidden opportunism of many of the members of these groups (`a decadent and hypocritical conservative elite, leading public and private lives that bore little resemblance to each other').
   
   This book exposes relentlessly huge monuments of vulgarity and ghastly political horror stories.
   It gives a terrible picture of extremely powerful political groups within the US society.
   Not for the faint-hearted.

2 comments about Mandela: The Authorized Portrait.

1. I hate leaving a book less than 5 stars, I really do. The book has lots of information and important facts about Mandela, but the problem I have is "ease of readability." There were so many things I just couldn't understand due to the author's extremely large vocabulary and phrasing. I suppose maybe that's my fault on some level, but the phrasing was so difficult I only grasped a small percentage of the book. Yes, there are lots of photos. Yes, there are handwritten pages Mandela wrote from his cell (none of which I could legibly read), as well as tons of dates and credits to acknowledgements. Unfortunately, I've decided to leave this book on the shelf.



2. Nelson Mandela stands as a Beacon in South Africa, Africa, and the rest of the world as an example of what a political leader should be. Not only was he largely responsible for the 'one person one vote' changes in South Africa, but then after he was elected president he served one term and retired. This is very un-politician like. Especially in the third world politicians seem to stay in office until they die. Then again, there was FDR in this country.
   
   This is a splendid book. It is profusely illustrated, and not quite a biography so much as a tribute. There are dozens of comments, interviews, documents from the time, historical reports and so on that record his struggle.
   
   Mandela did marvelous things, great things. I wonder though what will be the story of South Africa after he and his legacy are gone. There are political movements afoot there who preach that the whites should all be kicked out, that their property should be confiscated, and that South Africa will be like the rest of Africa in poverty and misery.

4 comments about Inside the Economist's Mind: Conversations with Eminent Economists.

1. The editors should be commended on their choice of interviewees! A better, but still "mainstream", selection of major economists of the last half century could hardly be put together. While the selection is hopelessly skewed towards macroeconomics, it seems fitting, given the M.D. connection.
   
   Several interviews (e.g. Modigliani, Sargent) could be very interesting to graduate economics beginners, who'd like to put the contemporary tools and theories they learn in a more historic perspective. They also show how the rumors about the demise of "traditional Keynesian" concerns are largely exaggerated. (Modigliani is not shy about his views concerning unemployment in contemporary EU-15.)
   
   I don't find the book to be accessible to non-professionals or even to scholars in related fields such as PolSci. Some of the interviews are highly technical, which is not helped by the fact that the interviewers are often former students or junior collaborators of the interviewee. -- This is, I think, a good thing, since this level of discussion will be most useful for (future) professionals who look for insight and perspective rather than Principles hand-holding.
   
   On the down side, many interviews read like the interviewee is simply sampling his publishing record. "I wrote X and then I wrote Y..." The more politically-minded reader will be disappointed by the policy content (or lack thereof) in several interviews.



2. This is a collection of interviews commissioned for a journal, Macroeconomic Dynamics. The idea is to gauge the position of the profession by asking the people who invented large swathes of the theory their motivations for doings what they did, when they did it, and how they did it. Readers find eccentric and irascible characters behind some of the major innovations in economic science. I loved this book, and read it cover to cover in a day.
   
   The book purports (pg. xi) to "contain[] unique insights into the thinking of some of the world's most important economists, whose work contributed to the evolution of modern economic thought", and indeed it does.
   
   Scientific biography is a passion of mine, ever since reading Richard Feynman's writings on his life and work. Looking at the path integral method as an undergraduate, you can see how he came up with it (if, in fairness, I didn't really understand it), how startlingly original he was in doing his physics, because that's how he lived his life---he followed different paths as he felt he needed to, and arrived at different destinations that others because of his personality.
   
   So it's great that William Barnett, the editor of Macroeconomic Dynamics, and the co-editor of this book, decided to ask these men these questions.
   
   In future editions of this book and the further volumes to come, I'd love to see a focus on the characters behind different approaches to economics and their reasons for taking contrarian positions to the mainstream---Foley, Nell, Solow and Velupillai (my thesis advisor, in full disclosure), as well as more traditional mainstays of the profession. A focus on economists regarded primariy as great teachers would be great as well, not just the theoretical giants.
   
   The book is a very rare thing---an economic page-turner, like The Worldly Philosopher, Adam's Fallacy, and Freakonomics. The personalities behind the science's blleding edge make for compelling reading.



3. Thomas Keene has an Amazon Listmania List called "Book Reviews: Must Reads." It links to each of the books in Amazon that he recommends as a "must read," and there currently are eighteen of them on his list. But oddly the Amazon system does not provide reverse links from the Amazon page for each of the recommended books back to his review.
   
   He is the very influential Host of the radio program, "Bloomberg on the Economy." This book is on his list of "must reads." Here is his review:
   
   "Rules are meant to be broken. Samuelson & Barnett goes on the list without a complete read. Sixteen stunning interviews; the candor shocking. But then, this is Samuelson. Taylor interviews Friedman; Blanchard interviews Fischer. You get the must-read picture."
   
   Keene's rule that he says he is breaking is never to put a book on his "must read list" before he has finished reading the book. When he finishes reading this book, as I have, I am sure that he will not change his mind.
   
   I have only one criticism of the book. The stellar endorsement quotations that appear on the back cover are set in a rather small font on a black background. It would seem that the publisher could have found a way to make those quotations more inviting to read. But of course this is not a criticism of what is in the book.



4. A review of this new book just appeared on the British blog, New Economist, in London. The first line of the review is "Published earlier this week, Inside the Economist's Mind: Conversations with Eminent Economists, has all the hallmarks of an economic bestseller."
   
   I have read the book, and indeed the New Economist is right. What most distinguishes this book is its "no holds barred" revelations and astonishing statements by many of the world's most famous "celebrity" economists, including eight Nobel Laureates, a former Federal Reserve Board chairman, the current Governor of the Bank of Israel, a former chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, along with other economists of similar importance. This book is filled with inside information from those who know the truth, but had not previously revealed it.
   
   The book contains some unusual photos, such as photos of Franco Modigliani with the Kings of Sweden and Spain and Paul Samuelson with Bill Clinton.