5 comments about John Adams and the Spirit of Liberty.

1. The most critical period of American history actually occurred after the revolution. The instability of anarchy threatened to make the ideas expressed in Jefferson's Declaration of Independence and the heroic successes of Washington nothing more than a forgotten dream. Another hero, one who would be willing to chronicle all previous forms of government and guide the architects of the constitution in creating something entirely new was what was needed. He was more than just another name on the list of American presidents. That hero was John Adams.
   Thank you, C. Bradley Thompson, for this inspirational account of an often overlooked and undervalued intellectual giant among the American John Adams and the Spirit of Liberty by C. Bradley Thompson
   founders.



2. Enjoy one of the biographies of John Adams, then read this superb book to complete the story of this great man. Mr. Thompson is a fine writer and can be seen on an old CSPAN segment giving a lecture on Adams. His grasp of President Adams's work and his ability to explain it are unmatched.



3. 
   To return America to its original foundation of freedom and individual rights, it is vital that we know the ideas of the men who created that system. This important task will be easier thanks to this book by C. Bradley Thompson. Readers interested in the Founding period and its legacy for our own time will not want to miss this book.



4. I am floored! I started reading biographies of John Adams after the musical "1776" piqued my interest in him and have absorbed at least 20 of them since then. I don't know how this 1998 title flew underneath my radar until 2004 but it did ... and I think NOW, after the 2004 election, is the time when every American needs to know what he did for us ... or TRIED to ... including: pointing the way for those of us who CAN to start doing something about the mess we're in now. His insistence on basing our government structure on actual human nature instead of a fantasized ideal of how human nature ought to be may be the only reason we've lasted even this long. Communism went down because it flew in the face of this wisdom. We could be next. Thompson shows that Adams was not only a political theorist, he was a scientifically oriented psychologist. So am I. And I know that he had a handle on psychological reality that exceeds what most modern psychological theorists can lay claim to. He was an Adlerian more than a century before Adler was a gleam in his father's eye. May ALL the Gods bless C. B. Thompson for what he has done ... and may his publisher start doing a better job of getting this book before the public.



5. I just finished reading C. Bradley Thompson's "John Adams and The Spirit of Liberty," and am in awe; not only of John Adams but of Dr. Thompson's masterful explication of Adams' political thought.

   I had no idea what a debt of gratitude I owed to one man, John Adams, who more than any other Founding Father developed and provided the intellectual framework that became the Constitution of the United States. At the very least this book should be required reading for any person who is interested in pursuing a career in politics.

   To all of you who are interested in understanding the intellectual founding of this country I urge you to read this book. You won't be able to put it down.

   And to C. Bradley Thompson, I salute you and thank you for your efforts in resurrecting the reputation and honor of this great man.

1 comments about J. Edgar Hoover: A Graphic Biography.

1. Rick Geary does it again with his graphic biography of an American icon, J. Edgar Hoover, director of the FBI. He uses his trademark illustrative style to chart the course of Hoover's life from birth to death, and all points in between. Hoover is now a controversial figure thanks to some scandalous, yet unproven rumors (mostly about his personal life), but Geary treats his subject matter fairly, and portrays Hoover in an unbiased fashion. This is a new venture from Geary's excellent "Treasury of Victorian Crime" series, and it does not disappoint. Anyone looking for a concise, yet thoroughly enjoyable biography of Hoover need look no further.

5 comments about Theodore Roosevelt, An Autobiography (Dodo Press).

1. That was Theodore Roosevelt's description of the plutocrats of his era - bankers and railroad barons chiefly - and it suits the bankers and oil barons of our era just as aptly. What a bizarre moment it was, last night, watching the second presidential debate between John McCain and Barack Obama, to hear McCain declare that Theodore Roosevelt was his "hero"! Of course, only a few minutes earlier, he'd proclaimed Ronald reagan as his "hero," but he had a lot of bases to touch. One has to wonder if McCain knows anything about TR apart from the quote about carrying a big stick. One of the uses of that big stick was to flog those malefactors of great wealth, Senator McCain. Roosevelt was a regulator. There's no doubt which side he would have taken in the recent debate; he would firmly have urged Congress to enact a package of regulations that would make Obama's plans seem quite moderate.
   
   To confirm my impressions of Thoedore Roosevelt as the direct progenitor of much of the New Deal and of Democratic platforms from Wilson's to Obama's, I turned directly to his Autobiography, published in 1913, after he left the White House and around the time when he abandoned the Republican Party to join the Progressives. Chapter XII - The Big Stick and the Square Deal - or chapter XIII - 'Social and Industrial Justice' - are both good places to start examining Roosevelt's thoughts about America's subjection to plutocracy, about the necessity of a strong labor movement, and about financial regulation in general. Here are some of his words:
   
   "By the time I became President I had grown to feel...that government agencies must find their justification in the way in which they are used for the practical benefit of living and working conditions among the mass of the people.... For this reason I felt that all that the government could do in the interest of labor should be done."
   
   "We passed a good law protecting the lives and health of miners... We provided for safeguarding factory employees... We passed a workman's compensation law...which did not go as far as I wished, but which was the best i could get, and which committed the Government to the right policy. We provided for an investigation of woman and child labor in the United States. Where we had the most difficulty was with the railway companies engaged in inter-State business."
   
   "It is unjust that a law which has been declared public policy by the representatives of the people should be submitted to the possibility of nullification because the Government leaves the enforcement of it to the private initiative... It should be the business of Government to enforce laws of this kind [regulations! Think ahead to the second Roosevelt's issues with the Supreme Court!] Ever since the Civil War very many decisions of the courts...as regards the application of great governmental policies for social and industrial justice, had been nothing more than ingenious justifications of the theory that these policies were mere high-sounding abstractions... The tendency of the courts had been, in the majority of cases, jealously to exert their great power in protecting thsoe who least needed protection and hardly to use their power at all in the interest of those who most needed protection."
   
   "It was an instance of the largely unconscious way in which the courts had been twisted into the exaltation of property rights over human rights, and the subordination of the welfare of the laborer when compared with the profit of the man for whom he labored."
   
   If you have access to this book, I'd also suggest reading Appendix B, Roosevelt's essay "The Control of Corporations and 'The New Freedom'." For John McCain to identify Teddy Roosevelt as his "hero" demonstrates either utter ignorance of Roosevelt's thought or else utter political opportunism and sloganeering.
   
   Roosevelt's Autobiography is spacious, a five-hundred page volume in the somewhat pontifical literary style of his era, but many readers have found it enjoyable and enlightening, myself included. Except for his benighted attitudes concerning race, reflecting the near-universal 'social Darwinist' racism of his era, Roosevelt was economically and environmentally a good deal closer to the positions of Barack Obama than to John McCain. If Roosevelt is to be someone's hero, I claim him for myself.



2. Sorry to be the pooper but this party is so extremely overrated it's sad. Teddy Roosevelt is a man's man and one of my favorite presidents but, at least in this instance, he's a pretty poor writer. I'm sorry to say that I just couldn't stomach the book it was so poorly written and I had to close it after choking down a little over half its contents. I know it must have been very painful for Teddy but he doesn't even mention his first wife, the love of his life, Alice. How can an autobiography be complete with valuable pieces of information missing?
   
   If you're looking for a good book try his biography written by Nathan Miller, "Theodore Roosevelt, A Life." Miller is a far better writer and seems to capture the Roosevelt that we all know and love. I have passed this book on to several friends and they have all come away with a heaping helpin' of respect for our 26th President.
   
   Again, I have to apologize to Teddy but there are just some folks who should not put pen to paper.



3. I've loved Theodore Roosevelt since my wonderful 11th-grade American History class 10 years ago. This great President was quite possibly one of the last true Renaissance men: politician yes, but scientist, conservationist, businessman, soldier, and, heavens yes! writer (he published, I have heard, nearly 50 books on many different themes). TR belongs to the end of an era when one could actually aspire to "doing it all," and he succeeded brilliantly.
   
   Teddy's _Autobiography_ is a fun, conversational read. The formatting for the Kindle is good, but not great, and a table of contents would be greatly appreciated.



4. Easily one of the best books ever written. Roosevelt is an exceptional writer who lived an amazing life. This book not only shares his tale, but shows you the ideals and ethics which drove him. Very inspiring as to the way in which we should all live our lives.



5. Witty, quirky, profound, lyrical--this is one of the great American memoirs. The 1999 Modern Library and National Review rankers of the 100 great nonfiction books of the 20th century missed the boat on this one.

5 comments about Right from the Beginning.

1. "Right from the Beginning" is the enjoyable autobiography of Pat Buchanan. His account of growing up in the middle decades of the twentieth century in Washington, D.C. is a page-turner, and he stresses how growing up in the pre-Sixties era was much different from doing so afterward. Some of the anecdotes that Buchanan relays in the book are laugh-out-loud funny.
   
   The book continues with Buchanan's path through college and graduate school to his days as an editorial writer in St. Louis. He tells the story of his hiring by Richard Nixon.
   
   The closing section of the book concerns the political situation as Buchanan saw it when the book was published in 1988. He believed that the moral climate of the country was far more important than the state of the economy, and was an unceasing advocate, not of détente, but of the defeat of the Soviet Union.
   
   Buchanan also has one of the best writing styles ever, and the fact that this book is still in print twenty years after it was published is indicative of how good it is.



2. This is #100 on the reader's choice non-fiction, of the Modern Library's Top 100 list. It's basically an autobiography of Pat Buchanan, who is as right wing conservative as they come. He grew up in a traditional, staunch Catholic home, and ended up becoming extremely influential in right-wing politics. I'm happy he never became president. Most of his political ideas stem from his religious up-bringing. He definitely would not be able to separate church and state, which would be dangerous.
   
   I don't agree with most of ideas politically, but I think it's important to understand all sides of politics and would therefore recommend this book as a great way into the mind of the religious conservative. It shows how dangerous religion is when mixed with politics. The fact that Buchanan proposes we hold a second constitutional ammendment, that would basically violate all kinds of individual rights is appaling. If it was up to Pat we would all be living under a government run by the Pope. It didn't work out very well for his twin Darth Sidious, and it would have an even worse outcome in real life for the Pope, or any other religious crazy man.
   
   So, that's why I found the book important in furthuring my understanding of the right-wing. I definitely learned more than I ever would have imagined.



3. Because I have thoroughly enjoyed Patrick Buchanan's columns criticizing President George W. Bush's war in Iraq, I decided to catch up my reading of Buchanan's books by reading _A Republic, Not an Empire_ (1999) and _Where the Right Went Wrong_ (2004). Having been favorably impressed with these two books, I turned my catch-up reading next to _Right from the Beginning_ (1988; 2nd ed. 1990). It is a remarkably well-written and remarkably honest autobiography. At times it is very funny.
   
   As a boy and a teenager, Patrick J. Buchanan (born November 2, 1938) was a fist-fight waiting to happen. Being expelled from Georgetown for a year (1960-1961) enabled Buchanan to overcome his earlier proclivities toward fisticuffs and turn his energies instead toward verbal combat.
   
   Buchanan does an excellent job of explaining his cultural conditioning in the 1940s and of explaining how this cultural conditioning posed great difficulties for him in the 1960s:
   
   "Americans who had grown up in the late 1920s and early 1930s had memories of a time when the United States was denounced at home and abroad as an unjust and failed society, a country that exploited the poor and sided with the exploiters. We [who were children in the 1940s] had no such memories. The 1960s were thus more of a shock to us than to them." (p. 30)
   
   This is a remarkable admission. Buchanan here acknowledges that he is the product of his narrow cultural conditioning in the 1940s. He also states that "[b]etween 1941 and 1945, that idea of America [as "a glorious and militarily invincible Republic"] was stamped upon us for life" (p. 30; also see pp. 139-140).
   
   But hold on! In his epigraph to chapter 7, Buchanan quotes St. Paul as saying, "When I was a child, I thought as a child, I spake as a child, and I acted as a child. Now that I have become a man, I have put off childish things" (quoted p. 175).
   
   So when is Buchanan going to recognize that his cultural conditioning as a child in the 1940s is something that he now as a man needs to put off, rather than cling to it?
   
   From the evidence that Buchanan himself presents in this book, it is possible to argue that his cultural conditioning in the 1940s skewed his consciousness too strongly toward brashness -- that is, toward an over-developed tendency to get angry and want to fight. When he returned to Georgetown after having been expelled, one of his teachers asked him, "Why are you so angry?" (p. 229). I would argue that at least in part he was angry because of his cultural conditoning as a child in the 1940s.
   
   --Thomas J. Farrell, author of Walter Ong's Contributions to Cultural Studies: The Phenomenology of the Word and I-Thou Communication (Media Ecology)



4. The man is brilliant and an extremely talented writer and TV commentator. Another great asset this author has is a sense of humor. He does not take himself seriously. He is loyal to his friends in good times and bad. He does not apologize for his ethnic heritage,his deep love of his native land, his deep religious faith, his Jesuit education. He is a well rounded person. I am always impressed with his TV appearances in that he never raises his voice or tries to speak over another guest. His manners are genuine. We need more Pat Buchanans!



5. A very insightful and readable biography
   of American perpetual Presidential Candi-
   date Pat Buchanan, who used to be very
   good on the McLaughlin Group. Buchanan
   got my vote in 2000 when he ran on the
   Reform Party tix and I was 4th District
   Delegate in Ches., VA. Buchanan's troops
   marched off with the matching funds, Buch-
   anan started a silly Newsletter and a new
   Third political party of hacks and started
   using that stupid 'judeo-Christian' moniker
   again. I threw in the towel on him after
   trying to talk sense into his brainwashed
   followers. His sorry Newsletter was always
   late and I ordered a bumper sticker from
   his website store and got his Amer. 1st
   Party Newsletter instead. What a bunch of
   idiots he has working for him! Poor old
   guy. His follow-up books are not very good.
   They all leave out the United Nations /N.W.O
   connection to everything. How the mighty have
   fallen. I can't beleive a man this intelligent
   is involved in the Knights of Malta and his
   heroes are Reagan [one of the worst Presidents
   of all time] and Nixon [one of the worst men
   ever in the Whitehouse. Can you believe that
   Nixon had Joe Namath on his enemies list? JOE
   NAMATH?!] What could have been...Sigh.

5 comments about Terrorism: Theirs and Ours.

1. Take a look at the cover photo of this book, and the inside content becomes apparent. You can see people, who are now branded as terrorists, were, at one time, chief guests in the White House.
   
   This book carries some of Eqbal Ahmad's writings and transcripts of lectures on various international conflicts including US-Afghanistan and India-Pakistan. This book does a good job of exposing US Govt's hypocrisy and its unilateral goal of furthering only its own interests at the expense of everything and everyone in this world. It also tells you why and how the Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts erupted, and why they have only worsened ever since they began. There's a brief discussion on the Kashmir issue as well. I wish it carried more details. Overall, this book presents to its readers a brief but accurate insight into the most prominent present day international conflicts.
   
   Do not think that if you are not interested in international politics, you may find this book boring. Due to its concise nature, this book is very much readable and comprehensible to all. I say it is a "must-have" for every American, because it will tell them what their politicians haven't. US is the only country that, since its birth, has been at war every single day of the year at some place on this earth. It is mind-boggling to imagine what kind of wealth its people would have amassed if the same trillions of dollars that have been cumulatively spent on mindless killing of people and building nuclear weapons that will never be used, had been just distributed in cash to its citizens. It is no wonder that Eqbal Ahmad's words carried a great deal of truth. Why else would the CIA send its operatives to his house at night to threaten him if he didn't shut up? Eqbal was however up to the challenge, and told them to pack-off immediately since he was acting only in accordance with the US constitution, which says - "No taxation without representation". He said that since his views were not represented by the policies of the US Govt even though he paid taxes, he had every right to protest.
   
   That was Mr Eqbal Ahmad, a foremost authority on international conflicts, alongside, I would say, Noam Chomsky. Do not miss this book. It is worth a thousand times its cover price. After reading this book, I can assure, you will be only egged on to read his other detailed books.



2. Now, if this only came with crayons and pictures to color in, it might attract the attention of those who really need a crash course in terrorism. To the point, devine intervention happens to other people, but the self-righteousness of powerful America is what makes it so hypocritical. Unfortunately, I expect this primer to be as relevant for decades to come, so let's hope it doesn't go out of print.



3. Wonderful prescient, but all too brief. Serves as a good introduction to the ideas of the dear departed Ahmad who would be a valuable contributor to the worldwide debate on what exactly consititutes terrorism. The way he shows that the term "terrorism" is construed to eliminate any links to state-sponsored violence and torture demands our attention and respect. This is a courageous and intelligent book.



4. This book affirms that American foreign allies are classified on whether their own goals converge or diverge from our own.
   
   During the 1970's and 1980's we had partnered with Saddam, deciding that he was a 'brutal dictator' only when his objectives no longer echoed American public policy priorities.
   
   Similarly, the people whom the State department now identifies as being 'dangerous' were at one point benign or even considered beneficial---because they had then supported our world view. It is critical and sobering to wonder who is organizing outside of today's policymaker scrutiny.
   
   Regardless of the administration, such relationships of convenience are THE rule in international relations. America talks a good deal about wanting to respect human rights, but the real world often facilitates less stringency.



5. From the perspective of someone from South Asia (Ahamd was from Pakistan), this book looks deeper at this thing called terrorism.
   
   There are several aspects to the official approach to terrorism. First, terrorists change. Yesterday's terrorist is today's freedom fighter, and vice versa. Second, there seems to be no such thing as an "official" definition of terrorism. Explanations are designed to arouse our emotions, instead of stimulating our intelligence. Third, government officials may not be able to define terrorism, but they know that it must be stamped out worldwide.
   
   Fourth, it's supposedly possible to tell the difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter. Fifth, the official approach ignores the causes of terrorism. Cause? What cause? Sixth, the moral revulsion against terrorism needs to be selective. Terror from disapproved groups needs to be strongly condemned, but terror from allies or approved groups can be ignored.
   
   Why do groups commit terrorist acts? Getting their grievances heard through regular channels hasn't worked, so, to them, terrorism is the only way to be heard. Terrorism is an expression of anger and helplessness, and also a sense of betrayal. Through the spread of modern technology and communications, terror has become globalized. Everyone is a target.
   
   The author recommends several approaches for America. Stop with the double standards. Don't condone some terrorism, and condemn others. In the present situation, such an approach will not work. Also, America should actually consider the causes of terrorism. It's a political problem; seek a political solution. The author also recommends reinforcing the framework of international law. Try going through the International Court of Justice.
   
   This is an excellent book. It's short, and written from a non-American perspective. It does a fine job looking at the background behind terrorism, and it's well worth reading.

5 comments about Madam Speaker: Nancy Pelosi's Life, Times, and Rise to Power.

1. Seems to be objective. Is very enlightening. Summary appears to be: She will stand for principle if she thinks her party does not, but at the same time is over the top partisan, and works extremely hard at her craft. My personal view is that excess partisanship does not serve the country well. Both parties need to work together for the good of the country and, I believe the book makes the point, that she has plenty of room for improvement.



2. I thoroughly enjoyed the book and Sandalow's insight gathered over years of observing Pelosi in action. While Pelosi may not be the most fascinating politician, she is clearly devoted to public service and a role model for other women interested in entering politics.



3. I normally have no interest in politics, and only happened upon this book because my husband was reading it. At first, I was only flipping through it to make another point to my husband about how different our literary tastes are (I'm a literature fan...he's a political junkie). Before long, I was actually reading the damn thing! The author has clearly been a close observer of both Pelosi and California politics for some time, and does a fine job mixing the personal with the nitty gritty details of a life in politics. This book has heightened my understanding of politics in general, and deepened my appreciation of the achievements of a woman serving as speaker of the house, something we are starting, for better or worse, to take for granted.



4. This is a terrific book that fans of politics, history and popular culture will enjoy tremendously. Marc Sandalow has written a compelling tale of Nancy Pelosi's background and historic rise to power. I was especially taken by Sandalow's vivid description of Pelosi's Baltimore childhood in a highly political family and how she later applied those early lessons with such skill. A great read, full of insight, passion and wit.



5. Amusing to read all the reviews obsessed with how boring Pelosi is--obviously not the author's intention to make her a movie star, so these comments really miss the point. Clearly this is a book that will find more traction in the classroom than in the living rooms of Oprah's Book Club members--thank god. Sandalow has produced a thoughtful and very well written history of someone whose political power (dull as it may be!), and representation of a certain kind of liberal ideology on Capitol Hill (ditto?) demand our attention--for those precious few who still have serious attention spans....

5 comments about Shrub : The Short but Happy Political Life of George W. Bush.

1. This provides a good insight into George W. Bush's character as governor of Texas, a character that keeps "shining". Even though this book also has a political agenda, it also spells out why voters need to do their own research prior to voting.



2. There is no other writer that has such a witty presentation on such a difficult subject. She saw George W. Bush and his impact on Texas and with her wonderful sense of humor told the American citizens what to expect with regard to education, guns, laws and leadership. As I read I was amazed at the warnings we had, but we "elected" him anyway. Molly said what so many think, but are afraid to say outloud. This book is not heavy or difficult, but explains what GWB did and would do while injecting lots of humor to keep us from crying.



3. Oh, that the subtitle of this wonderful little book had proved true. The world would be a much happier place. Texas writers Ivins and Dubose sat at ringside for Dubya's pre-presidential career, and herein offer a fascinating and humorous report card. George W. Bush had done very little to qualify himself as a presidential candidate beyond being born, which, one could argue, was not exactly his choice. (Karmic destiny, et. al, aside.) And he has done very little governing, because Texas has a "weak governor" system, in which the governor is actually the fifth most powerful elected official, with limited appointment responsibility. It is largely a bully pulpit position. Their report appears to be accurate and carefully documented - often by court documents. The record suggests that a Bush presidency would be very good for business and a disaster for the rest of us, most particularly a disaster for the environment. Bush had a clear environmental agenda: eliminate regulation, reporting, testing, oversight, fines, lawsuits or anything else which might prevent an industry from doing as it damn well pleases. His preceeding business career was almost entirely underwritten by Dad's friends and supporters, who might possibly have seen some advantage in being Junior's benefactor. His one big financial win, a capital gain when he sold his share of the Texas Rangers baseball team, came as the result of the use of eminent domain action to force below market sale of property to the team for a new stadium. Publicly, of course, Bush lobbies hard against government "taking," but he apparently didn't mind making $15 million on it himself. (This is somewhat reminiscent of that other Texan, Ross Perot, who railed against big government after making his millions via Medicare contracts.) As for his new mantra of "compassionate conservatism," George magazine reported that Dubya was the co-creator (with Lee Atwater) of the infamous Willie Horton TV ad which virtually labelled Michael Dukakis as a murderer. Atwater apologized to Dukakis from his death bed, but there is nothing in SHRUB to suggest that Dubya has ever expressed similar remorse. In the most repulsive quote in this book, Bush mocked Karla Faye Tucker's appeal for clemency in a September 1999 interview with a Talk magazine reporter. "'Please,' Bush whimpers, his lips pursed in mock desperation, 'don't kill me.'" The reporter noted that he must have looked shocked, as the Governor immedicately dropped his customary smirk. A good read. Scarier than Stephen King because it is real. Full of fun asides, coincidences and local color. Oh, if only the Washington press corps had read this in 2000, and paid attention, instead of offering voters their opinion that Bush would be a fun beer-drinking companion.



4. No matter your political beliefs, it is interesting to read about the background of our elected leaders; even though it is freightening and sad at times.



5. If I was an American voter and I wished to for information about the Republican candidate prior to the 2000 election I would have bought the first edition of Ms Ivins' book. A read would have been enough to ensure that I would not have voted for Mr Bush even though Ms Ivins paints quite an attractive picture of him. She emphasises his campaigning abilities and the undoubted fact that unlike the present crop of Republican candidates he was able in his gubernatorial elections to unite the two quite separate parts of the American right, the fundamental Christians and the old time Republicans. However she also hands out low marks for ability and honesty. Bush does emerge as a Daddy's boy with Bush Senior's friends only too willing to hand out loans to shaky business enterprises and later to election expenses. I amazed that this book did not attract that much attention when the first edition was published.

5 comments about Winston Churchill: A Life (Penguin Lives).

1. Let's say you know absolutely nothing about Winston Churchill and in a few days you're about to meet the President of your company who happens to be a true blue card carrying Churchillian. How can you make an impression on this man?
   Well if I were that man, I wouldn't be reading Martin Gilbert's complete biography. Instead I would read John Keegan's Penguin version of Winston Churchill
   Keegan minces no words, he gets right to it from Winston at Harrow onto Sandhurst and his military career in India and Africa.
   Keegan goes right to the jugular in explaining the Conservative politics of Churchill onto his jumping the aisle to the other party and later his high office during World War I and after.
   He describes Winston's wilderness years and goes into detail of Churchill's leadership during World War II.
   All is described and gives the basic essence of this multi-talented man of the 20th Century.
   In keeping with the abbreviated Penguin format, I say in closing, good show. Five Stars!!



2. I've never been a big fan of Winston Churchill, but after reading esteemed historian John Keegan's succinct biography of the man, I must say that I like AND respect him just a little bit more. Keegan himself confesses that he never thought much of old Winston until he stumbled across an old recording of his speeches (in NYC of all places) and realized what a gifted and inspirational orator and leader he was. He led his beloved Britain through her darkest hours in modern history, to a victory that was anything but assured. The people seemed to genuinely love him, and his sentiment was seemingly mutual.
   
   His years as Prime Minister during WW2 are the most well known, but Churchill led an amazingly full life, and his life of public service began way back in the late 19th century. Keegan describes how the young Winston, who did poorly in school, but had an undeniable intelligence, educated himself in politics, history and the English Classics. He was a romantic who was in love with his small island nation, and he dedicated his life to it. He was a brave soldier who served in numerous wars, including WW1, and while it would be fair to say he was a little too fond of war, he was no different from the average English officer of the time in this regard. In my eyes, his major fault was his hypocrisy. It just seems hard to reconcile his staunch imperialism with his constant talk about the virtues of freedom and liberty, and how Britain was the main proponent of such things. I would have liked for Keegan to address this point a bit more, but for such a short biography, I can let it slide.
   
   I was intrigued to learn that Churchill and IRA founder Michael Collins were on friendly terms and greatly admired each other. In fact, Churchill apparently had a "gut sympathy for fighters" which is why he had more respect for the Irish and Boers of South Africa than he did for Ghandi and his passive movement in India.
   
   Anyways, the book is extremely well written and entertaining, and I found it to be an overall excellent introduction to the life of one of the most important figures of the 20th century. 4.5 stars.



3. In 1895 when his father died, the sickly and indifferent 21-year-old military cadet Winston Churchill was flat broke, the legacy of a father who was a compulsively extravagent wastrel.
   
   Lord Randolph had been syphilitic since early youth. His mother, American-born Jennie Jerome whose father was a stockbroker and part-owner of 'The New York Times', was always attracted to men other than her husband or her sons (Winston, born 1874, and John Spencer, born 1880). In modern terms, they were trailer trash; in Phoenix, Sheriff Joe would have set aside a bunk in his tent-city jail for Winston.
   
   But, instead of slums, Winston was born and brought up in Blenheim Palace, built 1704-22 and still one of the great estates of England. American ex-presidents get palatial libraries as their memorials; the British rewarded their leaders with mansions and great estates. Blenheim Palace was one of the finest, far better than the estates later awarded to Nelson and Wellington.
   
   Perhaps it was the milieu of Blenheim Palace, but Churchill matured into a man absolutely convinced of the majesty of the British virtues of patriotism, loyalty, courage and fair play. For him, being British meant manliness, courage, tenacity and ultimate moral decency. It resonated with the vigorous American spirit of Theodore Roosevelt and the beauty of the strenuous life.
   
   President George Bush is reported to keep a bust of Churchill in the Oval Office; perhaps as a reminder of the complete contrast to himself. Bush ducked the Vietnam War in the Texas Country Club Air Guard; Churchill eagerly sought war, even though he hated it.
   
   Like Ulysses S. Grant, Churchill was a gifted wordsmith instead of a stumblebum. He free-lanced as a journalist while serving as a British officer and was sometimes earning 20 times his military pay. He never stopped learning, he wanted facts, order, reason. His mother sent him crates of books while he was on duty, and he devoured them all.
   
   Gen. Sir Herbert Kitchener described him as a "medal-hunter" and "self-advertiser" who was "super-precocious" and "insufferably bumptious." It was a good assessment. But, the public loved his books and even the Prince of Wales praised him. Whatever one thinks of Churchill, his career and successes are due to his own effort, intelligence, work and nerve.
   
   In brief, this is the story of a man who might well have ended up as a Soho souse, but instead became the greatest man of the past century. He did it through his own efforts, not because of Daddy's friends, money or ability to pull strings.
   
   This book defines the character of a great man.



4. Doubtless this biography is insufficient to really understand Churchill, but for those who are fairly ignorant of the man, it provides a useful quick sketch, and perhaps a jumping off point for further reading.



5. Let me make clear at the outset that I am no historian. Indeed, I wouldn't even qualify as an amateur historian. I am just your average 30-something fairly ignorant reader living a period of love for more or less recent history. Given this premise, I found this little book quite perfect for what I was looking for.
   
   This is a short, entertaining, and VERY well written biography of one of the greatest men in the 20th century. Because of the serious limits of my knowledge on the subject, I certainly cannot judge on the accuracy of the reports. However, to the best of my knowledge, the author is considered a reputable WWII historian. Indeed I liked this book so much that I also purchased his history of WWII. You can read this book in a day, and it will entertain you like a good novel, while also informing you as few novels would do.
   
   I would not pay too much attention to those reviewers that complain about this book not delving into Churchill's shortcomings as a man or as a politician. This is a very small book, about 190 small-format pages. You can hardly expect a comprehensive treatise from such a book. Also, I suspect that emphasizing Churchill's shortcomings would be like emphasizing Hitler's moments of tenderness with his lovers or with some German children during the Nazi regime. I mean, they surely happened, but it's not what you want to spend pages on, if you have only limited space to devote to the topic, isn't it? Besides, even if the Churchill that emerges from this book is certainly a truly great man, he does not emerge as a perfect great man. To me that was enough, and I am glad I read this book.
   
   I am grateful to the author, and I highly recommend it to anyone looking for a short, beautifully written biography of this man, to whom I certainly owe something...

No comments about The Cecils: Privilege and Power Behind the Throne.

5 comments about Hidden Power: Presidential Marriages That Shaped Our Recent History.

1. I was extremely impressed with "Hidden Power," which explores 20th century presidential marriages and the impact that first ladies have had on White House politics. The book begins with a chapter devoted to Woodrow and Edith Wilson and culminates in an epilogue about George W. and Laura Bush. Author Kati Marton gives readers a fascinating (albeit a bit light) account of the lives of these famous political couples and explains how each first lady coped with being married to the most powerful man in the world, handled the duties and expectations that come along with being a presidential spouse, and adjusted to the ever-changing roles that women have in this country.
   
   This isn't a super intense or scholarly book and much of the information in it has been presented before, but I've never encountered a book that's solely dedicated to the influence first ladies have had on the American presidency, and I enjoyed every page. "Hidden Power" is not a boring history book: It's an exciting compilation of the lives of this country's first families, and I couldn't put it down.



2. This was an enjoyable light, but informative book about presidencies from a different perspective than most. I differ from one of the panning reviews in that I thought it was refreshingly not leftist liberal journalism. The author seemed to take a non-political view of the characters with an expected sympathetic eye towards the first ladies. I also found some factual discrepancies that a fact checker should have found which - as always - puts a cloud on the author's credibility; i.e.: Ford was an All-American center for Mich, not a star quarterback at Yale. But her countless quotes from insiders were well chosen, very informative and interesting. She did her homework on those. If there were half stars to give, I'd give this a three and one-half. Certainly worth the time.



3. This was an enjoyable light, but informative book about presidencies from a different perspective than most. I differ from one of the panning reviews in that I thought it was refreshingly not leftist liberal journalism. The author seemed to take a non-political view of the characters with an expected sympathetic eye towards the first ladies. I also found some factual discrepancies that a fact checker should have found which - as always - puts a cloud on the author's credibility; i.e.: Ford was an All-American center for Mich, not a star quarterback at Yale. But her countless quotes from insiders were well chosen, very informative and interesting. She did her homework on those. If there were half stars to give, I'd give this a three and one-half. Certainly worth the time.



4. This is a fast read, but also nicely written, and very enjoyable. It is not exactly a scholarly work. A more scholarly work would probably cover all the most influential presidential marriages, or all the presidencies of the 20th century. Instead,Kati Marton pays word service to the likes of Abigail Adams and Mary Todd Lincoln, and assumes (rightly so) that we would have little interest in reading about Warren Harding, Calvin Coolidge,or Herbert Hoover. I was a little disappointed, however, that she skipped so summarily over the Eisenhowers. She justifies this by saying that "[Mamie]played no significant role in her husband's administration." (11) However, I can't imagine anyone playing less of a role than Marton attributes to Pat Nixon, and yet their marriage is covered at length.

   With a few exceptions, I didn't find any surprises here. For the most part it just gave me more details about what I already knew or suspected. The surprises were how badly Richard Nixon treated Pat, to the extent that H.R. Haldeman felt free to send her press secretary scathing memos; how truly "out of it" Ronald Reagan was by the end of his presidency (more than it even appeared); and the stubborn and sanctimonious attitude of Jimmy Carter. Of course, the last chapter, about the younger Bushes, is necessarily dated, having been written before Sept. 11.

   While this book seems to be based more on heresay, and the author's observations, than in-depth research, to Marton's credit, none of this is kiss and tell expose. Those looking for sordid little details will have to go elsewhere. Even the Kennedys' and Clintons' marriages are handled with decorum.

   I am an avid reader of history who appreciates tomes based on several years of research. However, as a break, now and then, I enjoy a "light" history, especially when it's based on recent events with which I am familiar. If you feel the same, or if you prefer your history simplified and easy to digest, you will certainly enjoy this book.




5. "Hidden Power" enlightens almost not at all. Despite the hype that accompanied its publication it is virtually certain that this book will be out of print in five years. It is revealing that the author chose not to cover the Eisenhower years as too pedestrian to warrant an effort. Her judgments and biases are not hard to discern. I give it three stars, though, because it does condense information and sort it to provide a concise summary of Presidential marriages. The reader must provide analysis and draw his or her own conclusions.