4 comments about Eleanor And Harry: The Correspondence of Eleanor Roosevelt and Harry S.: The Correspondence of Eleanor Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman.

1. He was a farm boy, the descendant of Missouri pioneers. She was a debutante of the New York aristocracy. On April 12th, 1945, her husband and his boss, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, died in office. Mrs. Roosevelt summoned Vice-president Truman to the White House and said, "Harry, the president is dead." "Is there anything I can do for you?" he asked, and Mrs. Roosevelt replied, "Is there anything we can do you? For you are the one in trouble now."
   
   Thus begins a correspondence that will last until their deaths, here collected by editor Steve Neal to give the reader a top-of-the-heap, behind-the-headlines look at the end of World War II, the Marshall Plan, the creation of the state of Israel, public versus private schooling, Eleanor's opinion of the British (not high, wait till you see how she tells Harry to handle Churchill), Harry's opinion of American hate crimes against Japanese Americans (he's damn lucky this letter wasn't released to the public back then), and much more. Eleanor is at first a little patronizing, a little arrogant, and more than a little disingenuous in many protestations of "oh you don't have listen to little old me, but as long as you are..." Harry is at first a little defensive, a little impatient, and more than a little dismissive of Eleanor's opinions, particular of people she wants in office and he doesn't. By his second term, Harry has grown into his new job, Eleanor has grown into hers, and they both grow into what eventually reads like a friendship of sincere mutual respect and even affection.



2. This book is a compilation of letters exchanged between Harry Truman and Eleanor Roosevelt during Truman's presidency. The book has an easy-to-read style largely because the author adds dialog to explain the situations, events, and results of what the letters mention. By using this dialog-letter combination, a great deal of history is presented in an entertaining manner.

   I would highly recommend this book as a followup immediately after reading the biography Truman, by David McCullough. With a little bit of Truman history, not only will you find this book a great source of behind the scenes information, you'll also discover that the letters written by Eleanor Roosevelt are a joy to read. She was truly a gifted writer with the ability to put emotions and thoughts into the written word in a manner that could be described as artistic.




3. I read this book in no time. In the good old days of great letter writing, these two protagonists enjoyed a rich and historic friendship. Although sometimes on the opposite sides of issues, the friendship betwen former First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt and President Harry Truman was a rich and ultimately fascinating exercise in camaraderie and mutual aid.
   From reading these fascinating letters, it is obvious that these two old friends actually enjoyed talking and exchanging ideas and opinions.

   This book, as edited, weaves a moving and extremely interesting story, reading very much like a good biography.
   I highly recommend this book, a good example of history making exciting reading.




4. Steve Neal has compiled some 250 letters between Eleanor Roosevelt and Harry Truman when he took office after the death of Franklin Roosevelt. In this small but thoughtful book, Neal combines commentary pertinent to the times or to the letter itself. While they disagreed on many things, he repeatedly asked her to write to him with her thoughts on events of the day, which she did and with great candor. President Truman was the first to call Mrs. Roosevelt "First Lady of the World." I heartily recomment this book to those who wish to know these two great people a bit better.

3 comments about Picture This: A Visual Diary.

1. Tipper Gore provides a very unique perspective on life in the public eye through this pictorial. Her simple comments and striking pictures tell a story about the Gore family, public affairs in the U.S., and people in general. There is an innocence of the pictures, they present themselves at face value and are very real. Perhaps having someone like Mrs. Gore nonchalantly taking pictures of some of the most powerful and important people from around the world when they least expect it would solicit such simplicity. The photographs are very professional as well. A good gift book for anyone interested in politics or anyone looking for a unique book about family life in the public limelight with a clever twist.



2. What a wonderful book Tipper wrote. I love the photos she took. She is a very professional photographer. She and Al Gore are my biggest admirers in Washington. Though, it was sad to see them leave the White House. But guys, keep democracy alive! Good book, Tipper! And Al, I'm voting for you for president in 2004! See you then!



3. I wasn't expecting much from this book. I assumed it was the vanity project of a second lady with time on her hands. What I found, instead, was an incredible collection of excellent photographs from a talented and experienced photojournalist. Skim past the family pictures (except for the one of Al as Frankenstein!) and concentrate on the pictures that document some of the most important people and places of our day. I'd recommend this book to any photographer who wants to be inspired by fine work.

1 comments about The story of the Secret Service (Landmark books).

1. As the leading civilian authority on the Secret Service, I modestly recommend this 1957 book by Ferdinand Kuhn (pen name?). This book is not to be confused---as I and others have been---with the 1971 Grossett and Dunlap book of the same title, written by former Secret Service agent Harry Neal. As for this book, it is dry and dated, but it is worth it for a few items (and the foreward by former Chief U.E. Baughman).
   Vince Palamara
   Secret Service expert (History Channel, author of 2 books, in over 32 other author's books, etc.)

No comments about Lincoln the President: Midstream to the Last Full Measure (Lincoln the President).

2 comments about The Death and Resurrection of Jefferson Davis (American Crisis (Rowman & Littlefield)).

1. Jeff Davis, beloved by many in the South and known as the president of the Confederacy during the Civil War died from heartbreak and mistreatment and looked old in his coffin on Dec. 5, 1889. His funeral train was as popular as Lincoln's removal to his home state of Illinois and much later FDR's train trip back from Georgia to Washington, D. C.
   
   When his body was laid in state in New Orleans, the prominence of the U. S. flags illustrated his burial as an officer in the American Army prior to his notoriety during the Civil War. He was first buried in a tomb of the Army of Northern Virginia in Metairie Cemetery.
   
   In May 28-31, 1893, after it has been displayed in the rotunda of the state capital in Raleigh, North Carolina, it was sent on to Richmond, Virginia. The route of the Jefferson Davis funeral train left New Orleans, stopped in Beavoir, Mobile, Montgomery, Alabama, Atlanta, Georgia, Charlotte, Greensboro, also stopped in Danville, Virginia. The funeral carriage was a remodeled artillery caisson with the U. S. flag prominently displayed. His remains were transferred to Hollywood Cemetery, The Third National Flag of the Confederacy decorated the head of his final resting place, with the Battle Flag at the foot. There is a bronze statute on his grave in the Davis Circle family plot at the Hollywood Cemetery in Richmond, Virginia.
   
   Much maligned after the South lost the war, he was imprisoned in shackles and chains at Fort Monroe. His life and reputation has sunk to a seemingly unredeemable low. During the first three years after his death, his public image was ressurrected to a state of near adulation, and his fellow Southerners recognized him as one of their most important sons. He remains so today.
   
   The reburial three and a half years after his death demonstrated that Southerners increasingly were growing more overtly proud of the Confederacy. On June 3, 1907, a remarkable monument designed by Valentine and Noland was unveiled on what would have been his 99th birthday. It still stands in the park named in his honor in Memphis. It included the Confederate flags and symbols. Let by a group of University of Tennessee professors from the North, they are trying to have his memorial park renamed and the statue removed.
   
   It was a great American and did what he thought was best for the South, his beloved countryside. It's too bad that his life following the Civil War was so harmful to his health and what he had stood for. The flag has been removed from South Carolina's state flag, and Maryville College here in Tennessee can't keep their Rebel flag. What on earth is going on? Do those Northerners want another Civil War? It is best to leave dead dogs buried and the prejudices along with them. We natives of the South will always love Jeff Davis and what he stood for; the flag will never die. Resurrection is at hand.
   
   This historian has also written WAR CRIME OR INJUSTICE? GENERAL GEORGE PICKETT AND THE MASS EXECUTION OF DESERTERS IN CIVIL WAR KINSTON, NORTH CAROLINA and AN UNQUIET TIME: ALABAMA AND THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT, 1950-68, among many other Southern history.



2. I have read many books on the War Between the States and very rarely come across a topic which is new. This book covers a subject that is little known by even culture concious Southerners. A very good read about an event that was pivotal in post war Southern History. If you are a Southerner this is a must. If you have any interest in the post war treatment of the personalities on that conflict, you will enjoy.
   
   Winston Churchill wrote - "Poor is a nation that has no heroes. Poorer still is one that has them and forgets them."
   
   This author has presented us with a way of remembering one of our Southern heroes. I think many readers will be surprised by this work.
   
   Highly recomended to Southerners and anyone who has an interest in the human experience.

5 comments about The Contender: Richard Nixon: The Congress Years, 1946 to 1952.

1. When you read this book, you should be prepare to be challenged on what you have heard about Nixon before. This book undoes--or purports to--all of the early Nixon myths. It appears to be exhaustingly researched, and Nixon haters can take comfort in the notion that Nixon became the Nixon they hated after the 1960 Presidential Election.

   Still, Gellman does sugarcoat some things Nixon does, and appears to draw some charitable conclusions without any backup. It is an interesting read, and a portrayal of what by any accounts is a remarkable journey from unknown to Vice President.




2. Though there were shades of the later Nixon in the young man, he was not nearly as visceral, vulgar or mean-spirited as he was to become as President. There were tinges of guilt in his make-up when he stepped over the line of decency, and such signs were utterly absent in President Nixon. Gellman is a fluid writer who is painstaking in being fair to Nixon and presenting him as a fairly likeable, though monstrously aggressive Congressman. He maintains that the young Nixon was a good father and attentive husband, thought he evidence for this is grossly lacking. He was the quintessential absentee father who spent almost no time with his daughters. Gellman conveniently ignores this.

   More troubling is that Gellman almost seeks to exonerate Nixon from two of the most mudslinging and tawdry campaigns of all time: his 1946 run for Congress against the hapless, though decent Jerry Voorhis, and his inhumane hatchet job against Helen Gahagan Douglas in 1950. Nixon's brutal character assassination of Douglas in conveniently skirted, or excuses are made for RN. Because Gellman frequently falls into the habit of glossing over Nixon's destructive impulses, the book never reaches any grandiose literary heights.

   Nixon has been the subject of much nonsense, particularly of the psycho-babble genre. Gellman thankfully doesn't attempt any of this and the book is a better product for it. Ultimately, this is a readable, balanced (overly balanced!) portrait of a young man driven by demons and a lust for power. For anyone wishing to understand Nixon in his 30's, this is an essential study.




3. The book is well-written, it is effective in presenting details of Nixon's early career, and it bends over backward to be fair toward him. It does not bend over backward to be fair to everyone else: Gellman finds it too easy to lump New Deal liberals with Socialists and Communists - making it seem the only difference that he sees between them is shades of pink. That makes it hard to accept his arguments about red-baiting - arguments that are important to Gellman's treatment of Nixon as an honorable, ethical lawmaker ... Still, this is a stimulating work and one that taught me a lot about one of America's most fascinating political characters.



4. I have never been very knowledgable about Richard Nixon. When I picked up this book, I was pleasantly surprised by what I learned. This book is an honest and factual portrayal of a man who served his country, and not the poobah of Watergate scandals.It is so refreshing to learn about the man and not just read criticism after criticism. Nixon's great character and accomplishments are in this book, and I recommend it to any student of political science or just fans of the genre.



5. For the record, this is an excellent book, and I too have read almost countless books on Nixon the last 25 years. The research is excellent, and perhaps for one of the first times we get to see Richard Nixon in the early years, without the baggage he is saddled with by people looking back.

   Still, there are problems with that: while Gellman can claim the early campaigns were nothing compared to later years, for their time they were shocking. It was a departure from the standards, and he was forever recognized as a campaigner that would go as far as necessary to win. The personal notes Gellman quotes from in the early years are insightful. Unfortunately, personal insights are missing by the end of the book: one wonders if Mr. Nixon stopped writing notes, or just stopped writing such personal ones.

   There are a surprising number of grammatical errors in the book (at least 5, perhaps more) but the surprise is due to Mr. Gellman's diligence in his research. Do not let these small errors prevent you from reading one of the few books on Nixon that attempts to provide a fresh look without apology, and without anger.

No comments about The Last Lion: Winston Spencer Churchill, Alone, 1932-1940.

5 comments about The Rehnquist Choice: The Untold Story of the Nixon Appointment that Redefined the Supreme Court.

1. This is either a fascinating or frightening account, depending on your viewpoint, of how in 1971 William Rehnquist was chosen to be nominated by Richard Nixon to the Supreme Court as an Associate Justice. The author was, of course, counsel to the President at the time and intimately involved in the process. Dean has drawn on his own recollections and notes, as well as having made excellent use of those infamous Nixon tapes which captured many of the key conversations involved in the mechanics of selection. Nixon was determined to re-shape the Court, but had been frustrated with his prior nominations of Haynesworth and Carswell. Dean argues that Nixon (with the aid of Rehnquist who was an Assistant Attorney General at the time) tried to create openings by encouraging a Douglas impeachment and the resignation of Fortas. When it became evident that Justices Black and Harlan, due to illness, would soon be leaving the Court, the "process" (if you want to call it that) began.
   
   Approximately 38 individuals were under consideration at some point, including Agnew, Bickel, Senator Byrd, Arlen Specter, Howard Baker, and Caspar Weinberger to name just a few. Dean devotes most attention to Representative Richard Poff, Judge Mildred L. Lillie, Herschel Friday, and Senator Byrd and how they were considered. Throughout the process, Rehnquist's name is mentioned by various folks, but he is never really in the running. The process swerves on erratically, names drop off, new names are added, and Nixon's frustration with leaks and the American Bar Association explodes. In the end, Nixon backtracks and offers one slot to Lewis Powell, who had been cut earlier due to his age, and is close to offering the second to Howard Baker. But Baker, as Dean terms it, "dithers" and wants more time and suddenly in a key almost off-hand discussion between Nixon and Richard Moore, his Special Counsel, Rehnquist's name pops up again, and Nixon learns for the first time that he had been second in his class at Stanford and had clerked for Justice Jackson. Suddenly the sun peeks thorough the clouds and Nixon decides Rehnquist (who he has never really known) is his man. The nomination goes forward, but Rehnquist had idea what was up when "the call" came out of the blue, only having his first private chat with Nixon months after the nomination.
   
   Dean adds some intersting discussion of both of Rehnquist's hearings (including his later one for Chief Justice), and reviews the issue of whether there were smoking guns in his background as to which he misled the Senate. The book contains a chronology, helpful notes, and a nice bibliography. An essential book for anyone interested in Rehnquist and that most inexplicable of all Presidents.



2. With meticulous attention to detail, John Dean gives the reader an unparalleled insider's view of one of the most momentous decisions in American history, Richard Nixon's appointment of William H. Rehnquist, Jr. to the U.S. Supreme Court. Using transcripts of the tapes Nixon left behind when he fled the White House in disgrace, plus additional source material from the National Archives and his own excellent memory (remember, this is the man whose sworn recollections of conversations about Watergate BEFORE the tapes were produced were never questioned after the tapes came out), Dean lets us see how bumbling, how innocent and how political a process this important decision actually was.
   
   Dean starts the book with the background of the plot to derail Abe Fortas's nomination as Chief Justice before Nixon is even elected, and exposes it for its political and unfair nature. He then provides additional background on the nomination of Warren Burger as Chief Justice, the unsuccessful nominations of Clement Haynsworth and G. Harrold Carswell, and the ultimate confirmation of Harry Blackmun to Fortas's seat.
   
   With no internet, no Fox News, no right wing think tanks, no computers, the process of finding and then vetting Supreme Court justices was primitive. Nixon spent all his time on individuals never nominated, and worked hard to vet them, only to have them all be unnominatable. Not having learned by having two nominees turned down, Nixon's decision to appoint Rehnquist was made on the spur of the moment. Yet, in important ways, it was the most longlasting part of his legacy, reaching directly to just a year ago and through the legacy of Rehnquist's jurisprudence, perhaps forever.
   
   The Nixon we see here is bare naked to the reader. He hates Jews, demeans women, has few goals other than the political. He is a man paranoid of leaks and very much in charge of his White House and his own decisionmaking. He has no patience for civil rights, busing or the rights of the accused; he would be willing to appoint a Robert Byrd to the court just to spite a Democratic Senate that would be unable to turn down one of its own. He seeks to embarrass the American Bar Association (even while ending up appointing its former President, Lewis Powell, at the same time as Rehnquist).
   
   Dean clearly dislikes Rehnquist, and of course by this time hates Nixon and all his coterie, but the book nonetheless, by its very use of Nixon's own words, presents the man in all his complexity and his kind of genius.



3. I was very pleasantly surprised to see that someone had finally included former US Supreme Court nominee Richard H. Poff in the annals of recorded national history. Poff was considered a shoo-in for the Supreme Court, despite opposition from many liberals. While some considered him a racist, many African-Americans spoke out openly and stated he was anything but a racist, since he had in reality helped their position. His record, both before and after the nomination, speaks for itself and Poff's brilliance as a jurist. In fact, he was a man who believed strongly in individual rights, and openly stated that no American citizen should ever be detained or imprisoned absent a specific act of Congress permitting it, which by necessity means that he would be opposed to President Bush's actions in the so-called 'War On Terror'.
   
   Those who have actually met Richard Poff know him to be a man who cares very deeply about people, who quite correctly followed the dictates of his constituents even if he disagreed, and who was vociferous in dedicating his life to ensuring justice and upholding the Constitution. Bear in mind, this is a man who had been in the House as a representative of the Sixth District of Virginia since 1956, so he served during a turbulent time in civil rights history. He made some ultimately rather unfortunate choices while representing that district, but they were all done because that's what his constituents wanted. Most unfortunate among these choices was signing the infamous Southern Manifesto, which opposed and defied the US Supreme Court on its decision in Brown v Board of Education. If he had not done so, he most certainly would not have been reelected, because his constituents wanted him to sign it. While at first glance it may seem that he sold out for reelection, or that this proves him a racist, think about it. He did exactly what a Representative is supposed to do once elected; namely, act as the voice of their constituents, who otherwise would have no voice on national issues. Yet, once he was nominated for the US Supreme Court, that document came back to haunt him - and most disturbingly his family and especially his young son - in a very big way.
   
   A moderate conservative, Poff was well-respected in most circles, and seemed a perfect choice to change the tide of the liberal Warren Supreme Court. After all, he had served for years on the House Judiciary Committee, and was an attorney who had years of practical experience under his belt. Richard Poff was Nixon and Dean's first choice for the US Supreme Court, not Rehnquist. Almost immediately, 30 liberal Senators threatened a filibuster, and Poff was forced to make an unenviable choice: either destroy his family during the confirmation process, or drop out.
   
   Fearing that he would have to tell his then-12-year-old son that he was adopted - something he and his wife had never intended to do - he chose to withdraw from consideration strictly for personal reasons. Within weeks, and after it was announced that he would no longer be in the running, columnist Jack Anderson announced that adoption to the world.
   
   I still don't understand why Anderson felt the need to do that, and I'm sure no one else does, either - after all, how does having adopted a child effect anyone's qualifications for the US Supreme Court? As a direct result of Anderson's column, Poff ended up having to tell the boy that he was adopted anyway, despite the fact that protection of his son from that hurtful information is why he had withdrawn from consideration in the first place.
   
   One must therefore respect Poff as a man who made extreme sacrifices for the protection of his family, even if one does not respect his politics. Mr. Dean explains this very well in his book, and the story has been confirmed by that son.
   
   This book is not only a political one, it is a moral and ethical one for politicians and journalists everywhere - how far is too far? The adoption revelation had a devastating effect on the son, as well as his parents, because until that very day he had no hint that he had been adopted. The son relates that the press went so far in attempting to get 'dirt' on his father that the family was forced to hide in the furnished basement of their home until his father dropped out of the race, for fear (obviously well-placed) about the well-being of the Poff children.
   
   It is one thing for the press to discuss the candidate and their record. It is quite another for the press to discuss a candidate's preteen children, when neither that child nor the candidate had done anything to draw attention to the child.
   
   Jack Anderson should have been professionally censured for crossing that line, and his source about the adoption uncovered even if it required a Congressional investigation, because in the process of pseudo-journalism he harmed not only the man he hated, but the man's young son as well. As a journalist, I cannot express how abhorrent I find Anderson's actions to be in that situation.
   
   On the bright side, Richard Poff eventually went on to serve honorably and fairly on the Virginia Supreme Court, where he was a highly respected Senior Justice for many years before his retirement. As such, one can only wonder what the Supreme Court - and, indeed, the United States - would be like today, if Richard H. Poff had not been forced into that very painful personal decision due to what amounted purely to vicious political muckraking.



4. 
   Overall this book is a good read. It is heavily biased against Chief Justice Rehnquist -- I really got the feeling that Dean despise's the Chief Justice. It portrays Nixon as a horrible president (Dean quotes Nixon as saying that no women should work in government).
   Enough of the negative aspects of the book. It goes into detail the vetting process of Court appointments. The author's direct relationship to the president and to Rehnquist makes the book even better.
   This book is not for people who only "like" to study the Court. I highly recommend this book to people who love to study the Supreme Court or William Rehnquist. Worth the read!!



5. If you love reading about the Supreme Court and the story behind the Justices and how they got there, then this book is perfect. John Dean was in the Nixon White House when Tricky Dick was looking to make two Court appointments at the same time. The first appointment, Lewis Powell, wasn't too hard. He was a distinguished lawyer. But what about the other appointment? Nixon couldn't find anyone suitable for the position. His choices were either not qualified or didn't want the position. As a last resort, he picked an obscure White House lawyer who went on the change the face of constitutional law, William Rehnquist.
   
   John Dean explains how Rehnquist was chosen and quotes Nixon saying some very unsavory things about women as well as other intemporate comments. This was the real Nixon -- a foul mouthed political animal who placed ideology over everything else. The book also talks about Rehnquist's unsavory past, including a memo he wrote as a Supreme Court clerk in 1954, when the Court decided Brown v. Board of Education, the seminal ruling outlawing separate but equal schools. The future Supreme Court Justice proposed affirming Plessy v. Ferguson, which affirmed racial distinctions in schooling. John Dean talks about this controversial memo and takes apart Rehnquist's position that it did not reflect his views.

No comments about Benjamin Harrison: Hoosier Statesman (Signature Ser.).

4 comments about Thomas Jefferson: America's Paradoxical Patriot.

1. I found it rather difficult to finish this rather long book. (422 pages not including endnotes and index). Length, however, was not what made it difficult. For some reason Alf J. Mapp believes it necessary to use difficult language at nearly every turn when such language is not necessary. I consider myself an above average reader and I must say that I struggled all the way through. The book would have been far more enjoyable had Mapp conversed in a style more acceptable to those of us who aren't quite up to his education level.
   
   His use of language, quite frankly, makes his biography quite boring. Unless you're a collector of Jefferson books as I am, I would recommend getting your biography elsewhere.



2. This volume is the first of Mapp's two volume biography of Jefferson. It concludes at the time of Jefferson's first election as President of the United States. The author has done extensive research on the events of Jefferson's life and the circumstances of the days during which he lived. He benefited from access to materials at the College of William and Mary, Jefferson's and Mapp's alma mater.
   
   The writing style is academic in nature. This is not a book written to be widely purchased by the book-buying public. Many will find the writing style to be burdensome. But, the depth of detail on Jefferson is enough to satisfy the most ardent Jefferson-phile.
   
   The last chapter of this volume is a discussion of whether Jefferson is a liberal or a conservative. Mapp has written a very enjoyable and enlightening discussion that highlights the contradictions of Jefferson's life. For example, slavery versus "all men are created equal" or his purchase of the Louisiana Territory without Congressional approval versus his antipathy for a monarchial President and his leanings toward very limited government action. All of this forms the framework for a discussion that is on point with political ideologies of the current times. The suggestion by Mapp that Jefferson's contradictions are born of his great intelligence and the ability to see every side of every issue is a very intriguing notion. If you were to read no other chapter of the book, this last chapter would be worth the time and may even stir the reader to start at the beginning and read the whole book.



3. This is a decent book. I was truly excited about reading it. I was particularly fascinated by the author's use of the paradoxes of Jefferson's words and deeds.

   However, I found it hard to read due to the author's needlessly pretentious word choice. My appetence for consummating the reading of this tome was stymied by a repetitious exigence to avail myself of a dictionary due to polysyllabic profundity. ;-)




4. Alf J. Mapp, Jr.'s biography of Thomas Jefferson, A Strange Case of Mistaken Identity, successfully conveys the unique personality qualities that resided in one of our most influential and least understood Founding Fathers.

   Rereading this biography on the heels of the Clinton Presidency one is struck by the similarities and differences between these two politicians. While Jefferson's intellect and accomplishments will never be equalled by William Jefferson Clinton, the outgoing incumbent shares certain characteristics with his namesake which the Mapp biography lucidly described five years before Clinton ran for office. The major difference between these two men may be that Thomas Jefferson did not hunger after the public's love the way a modern politician must in order to succeed. It is also highly doubtful that the American Public today would ever vote for an intellectual of such obviously of artistic temperment and intellect as the 3rd President. The "Elvis Presley" folksy charm of Bill Clinton is probably why he succeeded in his quest while Al Gore fell short in the Electoral College. Mapp's book succeeds in bringing forth what eluded many biographers before him, and that is the intensity of the passion and animosity that Thomas Jefferson stimulated in his politican adversaries. In this he clearly brings our outgoing current President to mind.

   There are other parallels between the Jefferson legacy and the Clinton White House, the commitment to internationalism for one, and an egalitarian commitment to popular access to higher education for another. But the times and the men are ultimately different, and understanding this basic fact is made most palbable by Mapp's major contribution to a considerable trove of already existing Jefferson literature.