No comments about Opportunity Time.

5 comments about With Honor: Melvin Laird in War, Peace, and Politics.

1. I loved this book! It helped me finally find a piece of history that was missing for me. I was born in 1962 and while I was living during the time period in which most of the events in this book unfolded, I did not have any recollection of them or their significance. I feel like I have a better understanding of my own time period. The book is well written and chocked full of important information. My hat goes off to Dale Van Atta for all of the hard work and effort that must have transpired in order to complete this comprehensive volume.



2. For every Joe McCarthy, there was a Joseph Welch; for every Nixon a Woodward/Bernstein team; etc. We all know about those guys. However, the real story of our nation's history cannot be understood without a record of the decent, hononorable and wise persons who have been present throughout our history, and who have prevented the country from veering so far off course that it can't get righted. (I hope there are at least a few such people left in 2008 to get us back on course now!) My father was a life-long, Democrat who voted for Mel Laird in every one of his elections, because Laird was such an individual, and I wish my parents were around to read this book.



3. I grew up in the late 60s and early 70s thinking of bullet-headed Melvin R. Laird as a warmonger who helped perpetuate America's anguish in Vietnam. I was astonished to discover just how wrong I (and many of my friends, as well as much of the press at the time) really were. Though the account is fascinating of how Laird, despite resistance from both Nixon and Kissinger, was actually working hard but finally successfully to get us out of Vietnam, I found the book more valuable for a different reason.
   
   Anyone who objectively reads "With Honor" will learn at least one thing: That it is (or at least once was) possible for Republicans and Democrats to work together and actually realize important goals for our nation and the world. What they accomplished through their efforts, with the integral help of Laird's talent for behind-the-scenes leadership, is nothing short of inspiring. It is a shame that Laird and his Republican allies, together with the Democrats they befriended, aren't working together again, just as this book shows they once did, to salve and solve some of the wounds our nation has endured of late.
   
   But "With Honor" is not just a history lesson that shows us "what could have been," had we true leaders like Melvin Laird and his friends working together again today. Finely written and easily accessible, "With Honor" accomplishes something political biographies often fail at: It manages at once to be a smooth, pleasurable, and entertaining read, yet at the same time sacrifices none of the details, facts, and stories that make this account so rich. And, as the best biographies usually are, the book is chock full of never-before-told anecdotes and facts -- some scandalous, some uplifting, but all interesting. Surprisingly, there is even quite a lot of humor (The story of the smoldering cigar in Laird's suit pocket at the Vatican is worth the purchase price alone!)
   
   Even people not normally interested in politics will find this book both entertaining and compelling -- not to mention hugely educational in the way of showing just how dicey was the birthing of many of the most important institutions of 20th Century America -- hinging as they did on a few key people with their hearts in the right place, working together for the good of all. There are real lessons today's politicians could learn from Mel Laird. Recommend they read it today!



4. This biography of Melvin Laird was written in a style that makes one not want to put the book down. For anyone who lived through the turbulent 1960's and or are veterans of the Vietnam War, this book is a must read to clearly understand the politics and actions of our government during that period. For others, the story of Melvin Laird is an inspiring history lesson of a dedicated and influential elected official and Secretary of Defense that gives the reader insight into the Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon presidential policies and decisions. Having read most of the self serving memoirs of the top players of the 1960's, I thought this book was the most balanced view of the major political and military decisions of that time in our history.



5. WITH HONOR...MELVIN LAIRD IN WAR, PEACE, AND POLITICS...Dale Van Atta
   There are three story lines in this authorized biography. The most prominent and both best and least known is getting out of Vietnam. It is surprisingly timely as Laird's warning to Bush Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld--"It's a helluva lot easier to get into a war than it is to get out one"--plays out in 2008 headlines. The almost eerie coincidence is that the Laird book was released the week that the generals were telling Congress that they needed more troops and more time. According to this book Laird [who removed General Westmoreland who asked him to "send me 500,000 more men" as Vietnam commander] would have (a) done the testifying himself and (b) would have asked "Did you expect the military to ask for fewer troops and less time? "
   During his entire four years as Nixon's Secretary of Defense Laird was if not the sole the most prominent advocate of what came to be known as "Vietnamization," his plan to disengage from that ill conceived and unfortunate military adventure. Everyone else in the administration was either opposed to or ambivalent about "getting the hell out" in Laird's words. President Nixon was alternatively both of the above, and Henry Kissinger, his main adviser on foreign policy wanted a peace treaty first, which put him more in the Nixon camp than on the Laird bandwagon.
   One of the most cogent quotes from the book was Laird's advice to the military, the White House, and anyone else who would listen that "time has run out."
   When President Bush invited all the living ex-secretaries of defense to a show and tell session at the White House it quickly became obvious that his administration which had unanimously been, in Laird's view, "bent on war" was really looking for affirmation not advice.
   One of the questions the book answers is how Laird got away with something verging on insubordination that no other Secretary of Defense has even attempted. Forty years later it is easy to say "because he was right," but that wasn't evident then and there are some who will argue the point even now. The real reason is that Nixon needed Laird more than Laird needed Nixon. This was obvious at the outset when Nixon gave him a free hand [in writing, on a napkin] to make all the "presidential" appointments in the Pentagon to convince him to abandon the Congress, which he loved, for the most unpopular and difficult job in the government. It was confirmed continuously over the four years Laird served as Laird won every vote from the Congress that he asked for Defense and the administration.
   The second story in the book is the gossipy one about Laird's relations with Nixon and with Kissinger which will attract the attention of the gossip addicted. The non-stop one-upmanship encounters on matters large and small with Henry Kissinger are given extensive play in the book. What is underplayed is that the two remain great friends and mutual admirers. Their struggles were a kind of gamesmanship it seems even though they involved a very high stakes game.
   What will titillate is what the book has to say about Laird's relations with Nixon starting with the quote: "...sometimes orders that came at night were not good orders to follow" and the fact that Nixon lied to him about Watergate to get him to come to the White House and try to salvage a crumbling administration.
   
   He also told Nixon that he would get along with the Congress better if he didn't make them feel he was smarter than they were. "You can't get a vote if you start on a pedestal," he told him.
   What is most admirable about the book is the third story, the often too short descriptions of his accomplishments over an extraordinarily wide range and the very high regard in which he was held in many important places. What he really wanted was something he never got and something he gave up when he took the job at Defense. He wanted to be Speaker of the House of Representatives. His name did show up on several short lists for jobs he neither sought nor wanted. He was regarded as a possible candidate for president or vice president. He might have been commissioner of baseball, and could have been chief executive of a large assortment of large, important corporations. The author does not say why he didn't pursue any of these. He was 50 when he left the Defense Department in 1972. My own observation was that he had aged 20 years in the time he was in that job. I was told that will happen when for 4 years every time the phone rings, it's bad news.
   The dichotomy is that when you consider what he did before, during, and after his stint in Defense, perhaps we lost more than we gained because of this important and perhaps indispensable diversion. We could, after all, be almost halfway to our 100 years in Vietnam but for Mel Laird.
   But still.
   Laird and his great friend and ally Rhode Island's Democratic Representative John Fogarty on the Health subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee can single-or double-handedly be credited for making the National Institutes of Health and Center for Disease Control into major institutions. They were also responsible for creating 13 "Lairdettes" on campuses across the country including the McArdle Center at UW-Madison to do cancer research. They did all of this over the dead bodies of notable fiscal conservatives in the Congress and the White House including President Eisenhower.
   Eisenhower, as well as his two immediate successors John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, named Laird the US representative to the annual conferences of the World Health Organization.
   His unprecedented base closing record while at Defense, incidentally, indicates he didn't abandon his own fiscally conservative roots altogether.
   He introduced Nixon to the Wisconsin concept of revenue sharing whose initiatives gave that idea a short and not so sweet run at the federal level.
   Talent was at the head of his criterion list when recruiting for the Defense Department. Of the 68 top jobs there, a little over half were filled by Republicans, the rest by Democrats, Independents, and a few "unknowns" which may have been "unasked." This worthy idea was discarded by the Reagan administration and hasn't surfaced since.
   He put his most trusted recruit Bob Froehlke in charge of a reorganization of the several intelligence agencies whose reports he always regarded with something approaching suspicion. The project improved inter-agency communication and reduced costs, which was either hoped for was what they got.
   He was always open with the press and the public and told his staff that the way to deal with bad news is to expose it. When he left the Pentagon, the Washington press corps presented him with a football inscribed Laird 194 Press 0.
   He is responsible for the military's medical school which has supplied most of the doctors needed by our forces in times of trouble.
   He and Bob Froehlke took the lead on designing and promoting a post-Vietnam amnesty program for young people who eluded the draft.
   He ended the draft.
   New York's Democratic Governor Hugh Carey gave him credit for saving New York City from bankruptcy.
   He orchestrated the appointment of Gerald Ford to the vice presidency fully aware that Ford would soon be president, because Laird knew that Nixon had lied about his involvement in Watergate and could not survive the ensuing ongoing cover-up.
   The book doesn't make the claim, but it is hard not to believe that he also got President Ford to name Nelson Rockefeller to the vice presidency. So at one time in our country's history, the man from Marshfield had a major role in filling the two top jobs in the country.
   He and Senator Adlai Stevenson crafted a presidential nominating plan that would limit the number of primaries to 16 and give a more important role to something now known as "super delegates" which is further proof that the law of unintended consequences cannot be repealed.
   He and fellow Wisconsin Congressman John Byrnes worked with the National Football League to preserve their monopoly, distribute their soon to be riches democratically and evenly, and, not so incidentally, save the Green Bay Packers.
   His dogged demands for diversity were rewarded with the unprecedented promotions of large numbers of minorities and women to flag officer status in all branches of the military.
   What we will never know is where else Mel Laird would have gone or what else he would have done if events and pressing national needs had not altered his own best laid plans. What we do know is that he did what he did with, as the book's title claims, honor.
   

5 comments about Paul Revere and the World He Lived In.

1. If you would like to go back in time and really experience what it was like to know Paul Revere, John Hancock, Samuel Adams & Joseph Warren - then this book is for you. It is an enjoyable read that really takes you back to Boston in the late 1700's.
   
   You will come to understand what an important role Paul Revere played in our early history. It is fascinating to see that a man who was involved in the Boston tea party turned around and left without sleep to carry news to Philadelphia of what had taken place. He made the trip to Philadelphia and back four times that year, averaging 63 miles a day!
   
   By reading this book, you will be there to see the painted faces of men returning from the Boston tea party, or feel the frustration of having the king's soldiers living in your neighbor's homes. You will experience anxiety as Robert Newman makes his narrow escape out of Christ's Church window after the lanterns have given warning.
   
   You will also come to appreciate Paul Revere - who was kind-hearted, quick to make peace with old enemies, and willing to do what was needed. You will find that at age 65 he took on the task of learning how to roll copper for the ships for our new American Navy.
   
   After reading this book you will find you have been both entertained and educated!



2. It is a rare author who can write a book that , 50 years later, shows few signs of age. It is also rare for the writer of historical fiction to have the ability to entice kids of another generation to enter the world of which she writes. Esther Forbes is one of those gifted writers. Fifteen years ago, my 13 year old son pulled this book from my shelves and found himself thoroughly immersed in the world of 18th century Boston. Although more has undoubtedly been discovered about the life and times of Paul Revere since this particular bio was initially published, this account remains vital and valuable today. I don't keep all of the books that I buy and read, but this has been in my bookcase for more than 20 years.



3. For this book Forbes got the Pulitzer Prize and it is hard to believe it is almost 50 years old now.

   It is a biography of Paul Revere but also more than that. It is also the history of Boston and the Revolution. Because of his important standing in Boston of his day, he was a coppersmith, a Son of Liberty and a prominent Mason, we get to know a lot more about 'the world he lived in'.

   It seems very fair and balanced. Not a great soldier or tactician but someone who was instrumental behind the scenes as a provider of weaponry and of course as a messenger.

   For those interested in daily life AND the Revolutionary War this book is great. It also shows you what Paul REvere did and why you find his name so often when walking around Boston.




4. Esther Forbes shows that Paul Revere was not just a guy who rode a horse and shouted, "The British are coming!" Actually, his famous ride to Lexington was a very small part of his life and contribution to our nation's development. Forbes provides thorough details about Revere's many activities and interests. In addition to his work as one of the Sons of Liberty, he was an engraver, silversmith, bell maker, military officer, and manufacturer of gunpowder and rolled copper. And if that weren't enough, he dabbled in dentistry. Such an entrepreneur! It's inspiring to see what can be accomplished by a person who is honest, hard-working, humble, and genuinely concerned about other people.

   Forbes also includes a lot of information about other prominent people from Boston, such as John Hancock, Joseph Warren, Dr. Benjamin Church, and Samuel Adams. These men played important roles, but I think the focus is on Revere because of the aura surrounding Paul Revere and his legendary midnight ride. We are drawn to stories of heroism in the face of mortal danger. John Hancock's huge signature ... well, it just doesn't stir us the same way.

   Most of the action happens between 1756 and 1779. It was a time of tension and uncertainty. Forbes shows that the people struggling against the British really didn't know how it would turn out. There were no guarantees of success. Also, the wrangling between Whigs and Tories seemed like a foreshadowing of the friend-against-friend clashes that happened in our Civil War 80 years later.

   The pre-1756 and post-1779 events didn't benefit from the inherent excitement of current events, so these parts of the book didn't hold my attention as well. Still, this IS a biography, and it isn't Forbes' fault that Revere lived 40 years past the end of the Revolutionary War.

   I enjoyed this non-sensationalized look at social, political, and military facets of colonial America. And now that I know what Paul Revere did beyond riding horses and shouting, I'm glad he's got a spot in our history books.




5. Paul Revere and the World He Lived in by Esther Forbes is a well written authoritative biography about Paul Revere. The book has a flowing but romantic aire to it... painting a portrait with words and describing the life and times of early New England and Boston in particular.

   Paul Revere was a multifarious man displaying many talents as the book points out. Well written, flowing narrative, being easily readable and well documented are just a few of the wonderful traits that the author brings to the reader. It's enjoyable to read and you feel like your right there seeing everything transpire right before your eyes. That's a talent raely found in writing and no wonder this book won a Pulitzer Prize in history.

   This book is well worth reading and gives the reader a good foundation as to what life was like for people from 1735 - 1818. As well, this should be one of the books used in our schools for teaching American History. The author really brings out a love for her subject in this book.

4 comments about Presidential Campaigns.

1. This is a readable and informative history of Presidential politics. Devoting one chapter to each election since 1789 (George Washington), author Paul Boller provides a crisp overview, followed by a host of trivial facts and tidbits. Readers get a good view of U.S. poltiical history, personalities like Andrew Jackson, Henry Clay, William Jennings Bryan, etc., and key issues such as slavery, railroads, robber barons, war, peace, communism, etc. Some readers may be surprised to learn that half-truths and mud-slinging are nothing new - Thomas Jefferson and John Adams were both accused of being enemy spies, Grover Cleveland's illegitimate son was campaign fodder, and charges that the Pope would soon rule the USA came with candidacies of Catholics Al Smith (1928) and John F. Kennedy (1960).
   
   I gave just four stars due to a couple factual errors (e.g., Martin Luther King was killed April 4, not April 27 1968), and readers may prefer the updated version - this one finishes with 1984. Still, this is fun, informative reading.



2. Paul F. Boller Jr. turned in a milestone effort with "Presidential Campaigns," combining an excellently developed historian's eye along with an objective presentation.
   This informative work reads like an entertaining novel while providing all kinds of fascinating information about America's presidential campaigns from Washington to the present, from which we can learn so much about our nation's history, using famous elections as an evolutionary guide to understanding the peaks and valleys of the Ameican experience.

   In that some of the subject matter is about heavy topics such as war and peace, domestic political conflict, and America during economic panics and depressions, Boller's humor is needed to lighten the heaviness and he delivers superbly. This is understandable since much of his career as an author involves books of anecdotes regarding American and British history as well as Hollywood's film world.

   This is a book that crisply and entertainingly tells us so much about America, as revealed through its presidential compaigns.




3. This classic chronicle of Presidential campaigns, from the get-go to contemporary times, has the unusual virtue of being useful either as a collection of short readable chapters - each just the right size for a daily bus or train ride - or as a reference source. Reading this in the wake of Monicagate and the Florida Recount, it's instructive to read the history of Grover Cleveland, who seems to have features of BOTH past Democratic candidates. Like Clinton, he had his scandals - fathering an illegitimate child. Like Gore, his career was rudely interrupted by an election which he won on popular votes but lost, in a hotly contested, knife-edge electoral college tally.



4. This is a well organized book full of useful facts that show how our political history has evolved over the years. Full of antdotes and trivia, the book reveals quite a bit about America. Very well condenced stories of each election. Reports things as historical facts rather than a political leaning (except for the 1988 race maybe). Overall a very good read.

5 comments about A Mormon in the White House?: 10 Things Every American Should Know about Mitt Romney.

1. If more people would have researched the candidates thoroughly (and read this book), Mitt Romney would be taking the oath of office in January 09. Those of you who are Christians and have said: "I won't vote for a Mormon" should realize that you're participating in your own demise. The liberal media and the secularists know that if they can divide Christians by encouraging some of them to be bigots, their side wins. We need to look at how the candidates live their lives and what they stand for. Christians should look in the mirror before they judge others. Romney is one of the smartest men who has ever been "dumb enough" to run for president.
   I would love to see how his analytical mind, backed by all the data his "team" would have gathered, would have changed the entitlement programs, for example. Now conservatives have to choose between liberal leaning candidates on both sides of the aisle. BIG MISTAKE IN 08!



2. I finished reading this book last night and after hearing that Mitt Romney had suspended his campaign. I believe he lost in the South because the voters there preferred another good candidate that just happened to be an Southern Baptist. Mitt Romney's resume is very impressive and his Mormon family values should make him a very desirable candidate to most Americans. They just need to get to know him and his faith better.
   I believe this book will return in the future as an updated paperback and there will be a Mormon in the White House in 2012.



3. PAY LAY ALE!
   
   Romney uttered these words in the presence of "angles" and witnesses in a temple of the Mormon church. Google it for yourself. Learn about the ridiculous church of Joseph Smith (of which I used to be a part of) and see if you want a man who chanted "Pay Lay Ale" while lowering his arms three times while wearing a Chef Boyardee hat to run the United States of America.



4. Author Hugh Hewitt has produced an appealing pro-Mitt Romney book that highlights the former Massachusetts Governor's political and business career and gives cogent reasons why he should not be discriminated against because of his Mormon faith.
   
   Romney alone of all the candidates has had to overcome the 'religious problem'to a greater extent than past Catholic contenders, Al Smith (1928), JFK in 1960, and another JFK in 2004. His Mormon religion was used against him by a member of the Kennedy clan when Romney ran against Ted Kennedy in the 1994 senate race and more recently, and importantly, by Mike Huckabee in trying to cement his lead in the Iowa Caucus race due in early 2008. While I am a lot closer to Huckabee in a religious sense than I am to Romney that attack, by the now front-runner in Iowa, was a low cheap shot and Huckabee deserves censure where it counts -by the American voters.
   
   America is the Great Republic precisely because it stands for across-the-board-freedoms and tolerance and Hewitt rightly warns that those Christians who wish to make Romney's faith a matter for intense debate and clause-by-clause scrutiny should be aware that they are opening a pandora's box for future attacks, by secularists, a cynical media and rabid atheists, against candidates of faith of a more orthodox persuasion.
   For those who may doubt that then the news today (23 december 2007), about former British PM Tony Blair announcing his conversion to Roman Catholicism, is instructive. Mr Blair said he was never able to discuss his religion in public in the UK, unlike politicians in the US, for fear of being seen as a 'nutter.' Thus far has the public square detioriated in the UK and if Romney is subjected to a barrage of criticism and derision for his faith then it will establish the same pattern for the future in the US- namely politicians of faith will be fair game and intimidated into surrendering the public square to the haters of religion.
   
   Like any other candidate for office Hewitt believes that Romney should be judged on his policy positions and for conservatives there is a lot to appreciate about Mitt: from his defence of traditional marriage as a Republican Governor in the bluest of liberal Democratic states, his strong defence and national border credentials, low tax policies, school choice, and a pledge to continue to appoint judges, as he did in Mass., that interpret the law instead of trying to make the law.
   
   As for Romney's pro-life change, Hewitt effectively catalogues some of the leading Democrats who changed the other way (to pro-choice) but somehow they don't receive the same attention from the secular mainstream media. Also what some might call Mitt's 'flip-flopping' can be described by others as him becoming more consistently conservative. Didn't a chap called Ronald Reagan move from being a liberal-abortion law governor to a consistently pro-life president? Come to think of it wasn't the Gipper once a Democrat? As Hewitt implies, being accused of being a flip-flopper is a very politically loaded term and frankly at times just plain silly as it it takes no account of a considered re-evaluation and changes of circumstances.
   
   Hugh Hewitt has written a timely book for all Americans to consider about a central character in a fascinating struggle for the Republican Party presidential nomination.
   
   In writing this review on my 29th wedding anniversary I am reminded that Mitt Romney is the standout family man of all the candidates- devoted to his wife and children and with no hint of scandal- and given the tumultuous history of the Mormon Church in the 19th century, plus some of those less faithful who seek to denigrate him today, you have to say politics can be an amusing business.



5. First of all, I am a Mormon. I did not have a desire to vote for a Mormon candidate for president simply because I shared his faith. I was interested to read about Governor Romney's life, and what would qualify him to lead our country in what promises to be a very challenging time in our history. I found that his ethics and his life experiences uniquely qualify him for this position.This book is very informative, and is written by a non-Mormon in an honest and candid manner. It WILL clear up misconceptions you may have about Governonr Romney.

No comments about Bourdieu's Secret Admirer in the Caucasus: A World-System Biography.

3 comments about His Finest Hour (Penton Audio).

1. This is a fantastic find for any history buffs who want to hear Mr. Churchill's words in the original format.



2. The editor's introductions to the speeches are sometimes inaccurate, but Churchill is a wonder to listen to. Highly recommended by anyone with an appreciation for history or literature.



3. Those 16 of his finest speaches made during the darkest days of WWII demonstrated courage and inner strength of a great leader in modern world. I and my 11 year old have enjoyed it very much.

5 comments about The Seventeen Traditions.

1. This book is one of Nader's finest published works. It chronicles his life, and how he was raised. He takes the lessons learned as a kid growing up and puts them into seventeen specific traditions that are very easy to read.
   
   The rare and valuable part of this book is that it's one of the only times you can find Ralph Nader willing to talk about his life rather than about politics. There isn't much, if any, political discussion in this book other than a few instances of how his family used politics to bring home values.
   
   I highly recommend this book to all of my friends and family. He touches you with stories of how his parents immigrated from Lebanon and the lessons passed on to him and his siblings. The book will give you an appreciation for spending time with family, and does so in a way that is easy to read and enjoy.



2. This book offers greatly needed insight for a nation filled with antidotes, from fast-paced labeling of psychological disorders to quick fix prescription drugs and self-help book remedies. Ralph Nader takes the reader back to a slower paced society--a world enveloped by the wisdom of his parents. Chapter by chapter, Nader shares pithy, memorable maxims such as, "Jokes are to words as salt is to food" (81), along with other valuable scenarios which serve as life-enriching lessons. For a sampling of the earnest adult figure many of us may have missed while growing up, Nader's book is analogous in resource value (on a smaller scale) to The Discourses of Epictetus.



3. A short book that reflects on society, democracy, and the peace
   of a good life.



4. I've long admired Ralph Nader and have enjoyed some of his
   other books . . . so when a friend recommended that I read his
   latest, THE SEVENTEEN TRADITIONS, I made it a point to get a copy.
   
   My only problem came afterwards; I couldn't put it down . . . so
   some other projects had to be aside as I read about Nader's
   boyhood in a small town in Connecticut, and how that existence
   and the role of his parents affected the rest of his life.
   
   As he notes:
   * I am often asked what forces shaped me. Rather than trying
   to give a full answer to that question-which would take
   longer than a limited interview would allow-I often reply
   simply, "I had a lucky choice of parents." My brother, two
   sisters, and I had a remarkable father and mother, who
   cared for us in both direct and subtle ways. The examples
   of their lives set us on the solid paths we have explored
   ever since.
   
   As I was reading it, I kept thinking of how my parents were
   similar in so many ways . . . in particular, this passage
   could almost have been written about them as well:
   
   * Mother and Father each lived to be just short of a century
   old; we benefited from their seasoned perspectives and
   wisdom for many, many years. They were forever young,
   exemplifying my mother's strong belief in the importance
   of remaining "interested and interesting." And they succeeded
   in doing this throughout their lives, attracting ever-younger
   friends to visit, whether we children were home or not. They
   created the strong family base from which my siblings and
   I sallied forth into the wider world, full of new experiences
   and high expectations.
   
   In sharing the lessons he learned from his parents, Nader
   also gave this advice that should be heeded by anybody raising
   children today:
   
   * Perhaps it was my father who best captured their attitude. Once,
   when I told him that I'd done my best at something, he leaned
   over quietly and looked at me. "Son, never say you did your
   best, because then you'll never try to do better."
   
   As the holiday season approaches, methinks that THE SEVENTEEN
   TRADITIONS would make a perfect gift for anybody wanting to
   read about life back when his or her parents were younger . . . and
   how much of what took place then could still be put into effect now.



5. For the money, it was not much of a book. For the talent accepted for the author, it was not much of a book. Simple platitudes which are mostly captured in the first chapter, and the rest of the book just re-hashes that theme: My parents were great, I am great, why don't you do likewise! Of course it is too late to change parents, but it does give some good foundation thinking for people just starting out to raise a family, and who are looking for some parenting skills.

5 comments about And I Haven't Had a Bad Day Since: From the Streets of Harlem to the Halls of Congress.

1. I "knew" Rep. Rangel from his work in Congress. His life? Remarkable. Wish I could vote for him. Better than Obama for presidential nomination. And I am not black.



2. Congressman Rangel's autobiography is exceptionally candid. For anyone interested in politics this is a must read. He tells it as it was and is. I can't think of any political autobiography that is so candidly self critical. While Mr. Rangel does trumpet his many accomplishments he does not shrink from expressing doubts about himself. It is no wonder that his constituents have maintained him in office for 37 years and that he garners over 90% of the vote in each congressional re-election.
   
   He a "little guy's champion." It would be difficult not to like him even if you do not agree with his legislative positions.



3. I was flipping channels when I came across an interview with Charles Rangel on the Charlie Rose show. I was not familiar with him or his politics but he had a level of energy and charisma that led me to look him up online.
   
   I enjoy political biographies and memoirs and was interested in his perspective based on his 30+ years in Congress. He has led a fascinating life from his boyhood days to serving the country in Korea to working the political machine in DC and NY.
   
   "You can not imagine and dream what you have not been informed of." This statement in an early chapter foreshadows how Mr. Rangel built a career and a life with no precedent in his immediate surroundings. The human story of his adventures keeps the book interesting. He is a great example of a person who learns from his experiences and is continuously applying it while striving to make a difference with his politics.
   
   The complicated mix of friendships, loyalties, opponents and foes are as expected with a political leader. Extraordinary stories describe his alliances and longstanding loyalties to his district. The fact that he has lived within the same area of Harlem since his childhood shows his dedication and commitment, as well as a marathon level of perseverance.
   
   I may not agree 100% with his politics but he has a way of stating his position that is impressive. One example is his stance on the war and the draft. Having served in the military during wartime, he is uniquely qualified to represent the interests of our soldiers. His position that those who support a war should support a draft is thought-provoking. Meaning if you support the war, you should support potentially having those closest to you as active participants.
   
   I'm surprised that I was not familiar with Charlie Rangel before, but I'm glad that I caught up with this biography. I appreciated learning about him, his career and most importantly his political stance that has and will continue to shape legislation.



4. Rangel has chosen to forget at least one bad day while he was in Congress. As a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, Rangel permitted the Caucus to use the franking privilege of members to mail the Caucus' propaganda. The franking privilege permits members of Congresss to mail material without paying any postage. John Cervase, a courageous lawyer from Newark, recognized that this practice was illegal and filed suit against Rangel in U.S. District Court in Manhattan. The Court rendered a judgment that prohibited Rangel from continuing this practice.
   This was not the first time that Cervase had the courage to stand up to the Black Establishment. In the early 1970s, Kenneth Gibson, the Black mayor of Newark, appointed a 17 year old black to the Newark School Board. The teenage member persuaded the Board to adopt a resolution that permitted Newark schools to fly the "Black Liberation Flag". Cervase, a member of the Board, objected, filed suit, and won an injunction against the Board.
   Later in the decade, Black "poet" Imamu Amiri Baraka tried to build a high-rise in the Italian North Ward named Kawaida Towers. The Italian residents objected because it was a racist Trojan Horse in their neighborhood. Cervase and Anthony Imperiale lead demonstrations against the Towers. The New Yorker published a good article about the controversey. Eventually Baraka, now the "poet laureate of New Jersey", abandoned his plans.
   Hopefully others who stood up to Rangel will tell their stories about other bad days in his life.



5. Charlie Rangel surprised me with his wit and respect for the institutions he has served in. He is a far more humble man than I would have guessed, but he knows what factors directed his life. Anyone who wants to see how his race has moved up, survived urban conditions, and then served and contributed has to read this book. It also shows how much prejudice and ethnic ties affect politics more this yuppie-fied world we now live in will admit. It has always been this way, and Charlie Rangel accepts it realisticaly and displays the years since the Korean war where he has served his country in its government. I like watching Congressional moves and am personally surprised more do not hang with C-SPAN observing both houses in these critical times. I found myself agreeing with the Congressman from NY City more than I thought I might; he is a brilliant man and I am glad he accomplished becoming chair of the Ways and Means Committee. The years immediately ahead are going to be tough, and we need him there. I am an Independent, but will always vote Democratic after what this current administration has done to this country. My book on flying helicopters in Vietnam stresses the USA's mistakes there, but the Bush Administration has unbelievably exceeded those mistakes of the past.

5 comments about Rutherford B. Hayes.

1. President Rutherford (called "Rud" by friends) is best known, probably, for being a (as his opponents put it) fraudulent president." Of course, this refers to (a) his becoming president while being whipped in the national popular vote and (b) the process by which a couple contested southern states (perhaps ironic given the 2000 contested presidential election, Florida) had their electoral votes assigned to Hayes.
   
   But what else do most people know about Hayes? Probably not much. And this slender volume, another in the series "The American Presidents" (edited by Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.), can remedy that ignorance.
   
   Hayes was born in Vermont and ended up moving to Ohio while still young. He went to college at Kenyon and then studies law at Harvard. Politically, he became a Whig until the party began imploding, whereupon he joined the new Republican Party. When the Civil War began, he volunteered for service and had a career of which he was justly proud. He rose through the ranks and fought ably in West Virginia and with the Army of the Potomac. As the war closed, his political career began with a vengeance. He was elected to the United States House of Representatives.
   
   The book continues with his political ascent, from Congressman to Governor of Ohio and to the Republican nomination for President in 1876 (with a handful of defeats, by the way, scattered in between). There were a whole series of contenders for the nomination, and Hayes' eventual nomination occurred because none of the major players could get enough delegates to be nominated, and Hayes was settled upon as the party's choice. Then, of course, his contested victory. The book does an excellent job dissecting what actually happened, and the interpretation is different from the standard view.
   
   As President, one of his first actions was beginning to remove federal troops from the South while trying to assure that recently freed slaves would retain their rights. It appears that he naively thought that southern leaders would actually live up to their promises to maintain the rights of freed slaves. The book does a good job outlining his accomplishments (adequate but not earth shaking) as well as his travails (intraparty disputes, gridlock with Congress, and so on). Apparently, he was perceived as honest and just, even by many opponents. Assessment? The author notes (Page 129): "What did Hayes contribute to the presidency? His biographers have generally credited him with unifying the country, though faulting him for not succeeding in safeguarding blacks' rights."
   
   Then, his post-presidential career is outlined.
   
   This is another in a fine series of books. The thought dawns on me as I am reading books in this series that very few 19th century presidents really stood out and were transformational. I knew that intellectually, but reading these biographies emphasizes the point. Anyway, a good addition to the series and well worth reading if you wish to learn more about American presidents.



2. The Bush-Gore election 0f 2000 is one of four disputed presidential elections in United States history, together with the 1800 contest among Jefferson, Burr and John Adams and the 1824 election which featured four candidates, John Quincy Adams, Jackson, Clay, and Crawford. But the most controversial of America's disputed presidential elections remains that of 1876 in which the Republican Rutherford B. Hayes was determined to be the winner over the Democrat Samuel Tilden even though Tilden won the popular vote.
   
   Hans Trefousse, Distinguished Professor of History at Brooklyn College and a specialist in the Reconstruction Era, has written an informative short biography of Rutherford B. Hayes, the victor of 1876, as part of the American Presidents series. For readers interested in acquiring basic knowledge of one of our lesser known presidents,this biography is a good source.
   
   Rutherford B. Hayes (1822 -- 1893) attended Kenyon College and Harvard Law School. He enlisted in the Army at the outset of the Civil War and served with great distinction, rising to the rank of Major General. Hayes was elected twice to the House of Representatives and served three terms as the Governor of Ohio. In 1876, Hayes became a dark horse nominee for the presidency as a compromise candidate of a Republican Party torn by factionalism.
   
   The disputed presidential contest of 1876 came to dominate Hayes's career and his presidency. The electoral votes of three Southern states, Florida, South Carolina, and Louisiana were sharply contested. Ultimately, a Commission appointed by Congress voted 8-7 along party lines to award the election to Hayes. The dispute over the election involved, among other issues, the votes of African Americans during Recounstuction. The votes of many counties that allegedly had supported Tilden were discounted because African Americans had been denied their right to vote by fraud and violence. The Hayes-Tilden election remains the most controversial election in our history, and scholars still are divided about whether the decision in favor of Hayes was proper.
   
   Hayes was placed in an extraordinarily difficult position as president with the Democrats calling for his impeachment and referring to Hayes as "his fraudulency" and the divided Republican Party offering tepid support to him at best. The immediate result of Hayes's election was the end of Reconstruction as the Army was removed from the South. Trefousse points out that this result would have likely happened in any event. Ironically, Hayes also withdrew support from Republican governors in South Carolina and Louisiana -- two states that were critical to his election. The end of Reconstruction which followed the disputed election and the segregation, Jim Crow, and discrimination which were to follow is the most remembered and unfortunate aspect of Hayes's presidency.
   
   Hayes himself was an honest, educated person with an excellent ability to get along with people, including those whose views differed from his own, and a good compromiser. He also had considerable independence and a progressive tendencies. He worked towards reform of the Civil Service System to base hiring decisions for lower-level positions on merit, supported education, and tried to protect African American voting rights. In the last two years of his presidency, he repeatedly vetoed attempts by the Democratically -controlled Congress to remove Federal officials and military personnel from polling places in the South -- on grounds that this removal would violate the voting rights of African Americans. Hayes pursued a moderate policy towards the American Indians and, in one of his finest acts, issued an apology to the Ponca Tribe for injusticies it had suffered during his Administration.
   
   While the 1876 election clouded his entire presidency, Hayes kept his promise to serve only one term. His presidency conciliated the nation which had been deeply divided by his election, and he governed in an honest scandal-free manner in contrast to the administration of his predecessor. Probably as a result of Hayes's substantial efforts in unifying the country, Tilden was denied the Democratic presidential nomination in 1880, and the election again went to the Republican candidate, James Garfield.
   
   Trefousse sees Hayes as a healer and a compromiser following his disputed election. Trefousee concludes: "aware of the tenuous nature of his election, he knew how to bridge over various disputes and thus heal the serious differences between factions, sections, and parties. ... His significance, then, lies in his ability to overcome factionalism and exercise power in such a way that the dubious nature of his election could eventually be forgotten." (p. 150) These were valuable accomplishments for his time. Hayes is not among the greatest of American presidents, but the manner in which he handled his disputed presidency remains worth remembering.
   
   Robin Friedman



3. Rutherford B. Hayes has always ended up in the middle of presidential ratings, and Hans L. Trefousse's taut biography of our nineteenth president would not move him up or down that list. Trefousse does a good job in assessing President Hayes as a man and as an administrator, though "comprehensive" is not a word used to describe the biographies in this American Presidents' series.
   
   The remarkable ascendency of Hayes to the presidency after the disputed election of 1876 has parallels to the election of 2000, but Trefousse (with an apparent dig at George W. Bush) elevates Hayes by suggesting that Hayes tried to bring together various warring factions while Bush did not. It's a good reflection. Hayes's stellar service during the Civil War, in which the future president was wounded more than once, is covered in great detail by the author. (Because of the quiet nature of the four years Hayes spent in the White House, this book needed some "fleshing out"). We know that Hayes was honest and his administration was largely beneficial to the country. I view his term as something akin to Gerald Ford's...a transitional time where the country needed healing. In fact Hayes's biggest accomplishment was the removal of Federal troops from the South, meaning an end to Reconstruction. That is the chief legacy of the Hayes administration. The president was also big on civil service reform, taken to higher limits by Chester Arthur a few years later. It's a fascinating reminder that Indian affairs still took up some of the President's time, but what is one of the more notable aspects of this book is how often and how much President Hayes traveled while in office and in retirement. He was the first president to visit the West Coast, for example.
   
   Rutherford B. Hayes served adequately and he should be remembered for a solid four years in office, if not much more. There certainly have been worse presidents but Trefousse justifiably gives Hayes credit for some accomplishments and I recommend this book as a good introduction to our nineteenth president.



4. I am currently reading a biography of every President. This is the first time I have selected one of the short biographies from the American President series. These biographies are very short, this particular one being 150 pages of text, made even shorter by the relatively small amount of text on each page - I would estimate roughly 2/3 the length of text compared to an "average" book. It is certainly more than manageable to read this book in one sitting.
   
   I was somewhat disappointed by the brevity of the book, which was even more pronounced than I expected. I will, however, review the book based upon its intention, and it was certainly not intended to be a comprehensive biography. The book does manage to present a full biographical sketch of Hayes with an acceptable overview of the issues in his Presidency. Trefousse's writing is straightforward although quite dry and he is overly concerned with comparing the 1876 and 2000 elections in an unsuccessful attempt to give the book a modern connection. Trefousse seems to approach his subject with about the same enthusiasm as a high school history student writing a term paper. The biggest shortcoming of the book however is not the lack of information but its inability to give the reader a true sense of Rutherford B. Hayes, the man.
   
   Ultimately, this book is barely satisfactory and I believe many readers will desire the more in depth biographies of either Ari Higenboom or Harry Barnard - I know I will probably go back and read one of these at some point. This book does, however, fill a need for a modern short biography of our 19th President and is recommendable in that capacity.



5. Despite what some have said of old Rutherford, he probably wasn't our worst president. In fact, if he had been elected in 2000, his compromising approach would have went a long way in meeting the opposition. As it was, his contested election was in 1876, and it polarized the country again between North and South. However, his compromising attitute healed the wounds of the Civil War and Reconstruction. This was at the expense of black civil rights.
   
   I thought the author Trefousse did a good job of detailing Hayes life. Some of the previous reviewers might not be able to distinguish the subject from the author, but I believe Trefousse did a good job of summarizing his subject. The author comes to the same conclusion I have come to. The 1876 election was a flawed election where Democrats disenfranchised the black population in the South and then screamed bloody cheating to those contesting the South Carolina, Louisiana, and Florida ballots. Rutherford was not Rutherfraud, but an honest politician trying to make a difference.
   
   An OK read on our 19th President.