5 comments about Chester Alan Arthur (The American Presidents).

1. Chester Alan Arthur was a surprise president. He was selected to run for VEEP from pure political reasons. However, he fell into the presidency and, against many fears, did not mess up in that office. As the author states (Page 143): ". . .some men are neither born great, nor achieve greatness, nor have it thrust upon them. Some people just do the best they can in a difficult situation, and sometimes that turns out just fine."
   
   Chester Arthur was one of the United States' "accidental presidents," thrust into office because of the assassination of James Garfield. This book, as others in the series, provides a thumbnail sketch of Arthur (text is 143 pages long). Born in Vermont, his family moved to New York when he was ten years old. He began his political work as a bureaucrat and patronage administrator. While he was enmeshed in the "spoils system," he was not corrupt and was generally pretty well liked. In 1871, he received a coveted position--collector of the New York customhouse. He earned plenty in that role.
   
   Comes the 1880 presidential race. Garfield, a "dark horse," won the nomination and Arthur was selected as his V-P partner, as a result of torturous Republican politics. And he had never been elected to any office prior to that!
   
   The Republicans won, Garfield was assassinated, and Arthur became president. One comment says a great deal, when someone said (Page 61): "Chet Arthur? President of the United States? Good God!" Against the expectations of many, he served without any great errors, and with some positive contributions. (1) While he did not take an active role, he did sign the Pendleton Law, providing Civil Service reform. (2) He did take steps to modernize the embarrassing United States Navy. (3) He was involved with reducing the tariff. (4) Etc. Perhaps more important, he made no major blunders (as many had expected).
   
   He was diagnosed with a dreadful disease, Bright's Disease, which made the last part of his stint as President miserable. While he would have liked another term, such was not to be. He left the presidency with dignity, but with a disease that doomed him.
   
   All in all, a nice biography of a little known and not very great president--but one who did not make things worse than when he entered office.



2. Not all presidents are created equal. While there are plenty of big name presidents - Washington, Lincoln, FDR, etc. - there are also plenty of obscure ones who are mere footnotes in American history. Chester Arthur definitely fits in this latter category. As Zachary Karabell's brief biography relates, this obscurity is well-deserved. Arthur was neither good nor bad and served in a time that had no real crises.
   
   Arthur spent most of his career in appointed positions, not seeking election until asked to be Garfield's running mate as an attempt to balance the two wings of the Republican party. Arthur was, to be blunt, a party hack, a loyal Republican who may have been honest but was no activist. Instead, Arthur was a realist who rarely let his ideals overwhelm his pragmatism. Accepting the vice presidency only out of party loyalty and with no ambition for the top office; when Garfield was assassinated, Arthur wound up being one of the most reluctant presidents ever.
   
   Arthur did have some redeeming values and occasionally took risks, such as when he vetoed a clearly racist immigration bill. For the most part, however, he rarely pushed his ideas very hard. The most significant legislation to arise during his presidency dealt with civil service reform, but he didn't provide much leadership on the issue. When he did become president, he put the office above party loyalty, which would cost him any chance at the nomination in the next election.
   
   As part of the American Presidents series, this biography is very brief (less that 150 pages) and focuses primarily on Arthur's tenure in office. With these editorial limitations, Karabell is restricted in giving much real details on Arthur, who winds us being a remote character who it's hard to get a feel for. Nonetheless, this is a well-written book and Karabell is able to put Arthur in the context of his times. As an introduction to this minor Chief Executive, this book works well.



3. As a cursory look at the shelves of any bookstore would show, figures such as Lincoln, Churchill, or the Roosevelts are often frequented by biographers to various levels of success. This is possible given both the amount of writings and speeches left behind from these types of figures, and their enduring influence in today's government and society.
   
   Harder to write are biographies on historical figures who seemed to have only passed through the night, important as links in a chain, but without personal significance in their own right. In the American Presidents series, John Dean was successful in resuscitating life into the otherwise dead legend of Warren Harding. Less successful was Kevin Phillips' book on William McKinley.
   
   Alas, this short bio on Chester Arthur by Zachary Carabell falls closer to the latter than the former in trying to find interest in a long forgotten president. Carabell acknowledges the difficulty with his subject since Arthur was the accidental president (took office after Garfield's assassination) and a person who was satisfied in acting as the unseen executive in the political machine.
   
   Arthur left no historical papers of interest. The most interesting anecdote was his venture into the 1850's Kansas-Missouri civil war. But even this ended without drama with his running back on almost the next train to New York.
   
   The author seeks to find importance to the Arthur administration, but his efforts are in vain. The author's best effort was discussing Arthur's efforts to redecorate the White House. That Louis Tiffany was contracted by Arthur to be the decorator showed exceedingly good taste for the widower president.
   
   As for policy, however, Carabell could only be said to have convinced himself that Arthur achieved any importance. Aside from some minor naval buildup, he initiated no legislation. Arthur vetoed a blatantly bigoted anti-immigration bill, but immediately signed a slightly revised version. He signed a civil service reform bill, but played no part in its passage and only after its passage by a lame-duck Congress that was soundly defeated in the just completed elections. The author concludes that Arthur could not be blamed for his party's resounding election defeats and later loss of the presidency, but that only magnifies his lack of influence within his own party and the electorate. Most odd was the author's stated surprise at the lack of biographies written about Arthur. After completing this work, one could only wonder why anyone would want to write anything more about him.



4. Back in the post Civil War days when many plum governmental jobs were gotten from political bosses, Chester A. Arthur had one of the best patronage jobs of all, collector at the US Customhouse in New York. Prior to the federal income tax, this was the country's principal source of income. The collector, under the perfectly legal rules of that time, got a commission on what he collected as well as a comfortable salary. If you paid an assessment to the party, you might be able to secure a patronage job. From this system arose the career of Arthur.
   
   The Republican party was divided into factions. The stalwarts (who had been Ulysses S. Grant supporters) were led by Senator Roscoe Conkling of New York. There was a reform wing of the party and then there was a faction, led by James Blaine of Maine (hmmmm that rhymes) called the half breeds. Arthur was aligned with the stalwarts and the patronage system. As a stylish New York lawyer who was in to the local social scene, he was happy being part of the bureaucracy. At times, he would lose his spoils system position in the bureaucracy due to politics but, he always had his law practice to fall back on. In 1880, his life changed as he ended up as a sort of unoffending compromise candidate for vice president on the ticket led by James Garfield. They were elected and shorly thereafter, Garfield was assasinated. Arthur, who had no aspirations ended up as president. He was as reluctant to assume the presidency as the rest of the nation was to have him take that office.
   
   There were low expectations for Arthur, after all, he was never elected to office other than as Grafield's running mate. However, although he may not have been a great leader, there were significant accomplishments during his term. Most notable was the Pendleton Civil Service Act which began the breakup of the spoils system from which Arthur had arisen. Arthur took moral stands opposing an anti Chinese immigrant piece of legislation and a pork barrel Rivers and Harbors bill. His opposition to both led to their being significantly modified but, he didn't have the political clout to ultimately prevent either from being enacted. All he really did was cut his stalwart ties without creating any real new alliance with the reformers.
   
   Arthur was ill. He had a kidney disease. Also, he really didn't want to be president. However, pride made him seek the nomination in 1884. He had cut himself off from his stalwart base and was not renominated. The Republican nominee, Blaine, lost a close election to Grover Cleveland. All in all, Arthur wasn't a bad president and perhaps deserves to be remembered in history. However, he was not a great president either. The picture that author Zachary Karabell paints is of a president whose legacy may be that he did a decent job of presiding over a period of peace and prosperity.



5. The wonderful thing about reading books concerning the US Presidents is that these men represent a finite group.....forty-two men and forty-three presidencies. Writing for "The American Presidents" series, Zachary Karabell has offered up a slightly expanded thumbnail sketch of our twenty-first president, Chester Alan Arthur.
   
   Since Arthur held the office of president, someone has to write about him. The problem with President Arthur is that not much about him survives. Most of his papers were destroyed after his death, so Karabell must rely largely on newspaper accounts of the day mixed in with a few anecdotes regarding the president, which, as the author mentions, may or may not be true.
   
   We know that Arthur was a bon vivant, never aspired to the presidency and was passable at being the chief executive during his tenure from 1881-1885. Indeed, most presidential ratings place Arthur squarely in the middle or slightly below. Even the Pendleton Civil Service Act of 1883, the most important piece of legislation passed during Arthur's presidency, was not a direct act of Arthur's leadership. (I think one more lasting thing to come out of the Arthur years, which Karabell doesn't touch on, is the adoption of Standard Time)
   
   The author does his best to be fair. The few parts of this book with any real drama are Arthur's dealings with Senators Roscoe Conkling and James G. Blaine. The president certainly had a balancing act to do with these two bitter adversaries.
   
   Chester Alan Arthur undoubtedly brought style and grace to the presidency and presided over a few relatively quiet and prosperous years in the United States. We should at least give him credit for that.

5 comments about Mornings On Horseback: The Story of an Extraordinary Family, a Vanished Way of Life, and the Unique Child Who Became Theodore Roosevelt.

1. David McCullough makes Teddy Roosevelt a very dull character and this book is very slow. I stopped reading half was through.
   
   I am a big fan of David's but this book is a stinker.



2. I was really expecting more TR info in this book... a little more than I needed to know about his family and acquaintances and not enough about the man himself.



3. David McCullough's writing is superb. I have to admit I liked Thedore Roosevelt better as a person in Theodore Rex. His personal correspondence in this book reveals too much about his apparent enjoyment in killing animals for my taste. IMO his image as a conservationist is tarnished by the joy he took in killing. I was especially offended by his shooting the neighbor's dog when riding his horse. If I had lived back then and he shot my dog, I can safely say it would have been the last dog he ever shot and his departure from life would have been made slow and painful...
   
   But that dislike of his joy of killing aside, he and his family were extraordinary. One cannot change history, so I go with the flow to learn more about it and the people in it...



4. This book is an excellent history material. For those who are studying or are just interested in American history, this a great secondary source that brings Theodore Roosevelt, Jr. to life. The style Mr. David McCullough uses is very easy to understand, and it is also very descriptive in nature which makes readers feel they were present at the scene. The only weakness is that the book limits T.R.'s life to a 19 year period, which happens before his greatest achievements. Basically, the author leaves you wanting more...
   Great choice of biography, great author, and accessable price!
   F.C, GA



5. The two readers for this meticulously researched biography of Theodore Roosevelt add appeal, especially when reading the parts with the southern lady or Irish accents. Well done!

5 comments about Ulysses S. Grant (The American Presidents).

1. Ulysses S. Grant (born Hiram Ulysses Grant, but there's a story there, as summarized in this work) was to ascend to the highest ranks in the hearts of his countrymen--from commanding general of the Union forces to President of the United States.
   
   His rise to such positions seemed most unlikely to those who knew him in the years after the Mexican War. He grew up in Ohio and, through happenstance, ended up at West Point. He completed his studies, ranking in the middle of the pack in his class. He was noteworthy for his skills as a horseman and for his mathematical ability. His performance in the Mexican War was very strong. In the process of his tour of duty, he served under both Zachary Taylor and Winfield Scott, and learned considerably about what makes a general. Thereafter, he had a series of postings leaving him isolated and sometimes "on the bottle," where he developed a reputation as a drunk.
   
   There follows the familiar story of his departure from the army, failed effort after failed effort at creating a solid economic grounding h=for his family. As the Civil War opened, while he was working in the family store in Galena, Illinois, he served as an officer as civilian military units were formed.
   
   After that, his meteoric rise in the Army--from regiment command to commanding general of all Union forces. In between, he displayed the ability to win battles that often led other generals to retreat. In the process, Americans had come to respect him as the war closed.
   
   The book chronicles his disagreements with Andrew Johnson's policies after Lincoln's assassination. Then, in 1868, Grant was nominated by the Republicans for president. This book takes a hard look at his presidency--the good, the bad, and the ugly. There were some important contributions--despite faltering, he did try to support the newly won rights of former slaves; he also supported humane treatment of Indians (even against the wishes of his top lieutenants--William Sherman and Phil Sheridan). But his economic policy contributed to the Panic that engulfed his second administration. His blind eye toward corruption of some of his colleagues does him no honor in history. There were also some foreign policy successes, to round out the picture.
   
   And, his final years, in which he courageously tried to provide for his families' economic security.
   
   All in all, another good entry in this series of brief biographies (155 pages of text, with a useful chronology following the text). As always, if one wishes a quick and accessible view of this American president, this book will do nicely. And, even though this book is brief, the author pouts Grant's performance as president in a nice context.



2. While Bunting does a creditable job of presenting an accurate chronology of Grant's career, the concise format leaves minimal opportunity to examine motivations and nuance of the many facets of the general and president. Those interested in Grant and the Civil War /post-war reconstruction will find this a worthy starting point only - for a more insightful examination the next step would be Grant's autobiography itself. Do not choose this text for coverage of the Civil War engagements to any extent. Bunting has delivered a well-written but terse overview of an impossibly complex character and time in American history.



3. The short volumes in the American Presidents series offer an outstanding way for readers to get reacquainted with American history and with our Nation's leaders. Each volume is written by a scholar who brings his or her own perspective to the subject, focusing on the factors that make the president in question worth knowing and remembering. In this volume of the series, Josiah Bunting III offers an admirable and challenging portrait of U.S. Grant (1822 -- 1885) who served as the eighteenth president of the United States (1869 -- 1877). Bunting is a former army officer who served as the superintendant of the Virginia Military Institute for many years. He offers a reappraisal of the Grant presidency in this volume, in company with some other contemporary scholarly reassessments.
   
   As Bunting emphasizes, Grant has suffered from cliches both as General and as President. He is frequently castigated as a "drunk" (Grant did indeed have problems with alcohol early in his career) and as a "butcher", in spite of the extraordinary strategic skill he displayed in the Vicksburg campaign, at Fort Donelson, in crossing the James River en route to Petersburg, and elsewhere (and in spite of the relatively low casualty rates, overall, of the armies under his command). In his presidency, Grant is often found at the bottome of the various rankings, primarily due to the corruption that ensued during his administration.
   
   Bunting's book offers a brief portrait of Grant's early life and a good brief summary of his accomplishments during the Civil War. He also offers a brisk account of Grant's activities during the four years between Appomattox and Grant's own election to the presidency, focusing on his increasingly strained relationship with Andrew Johnson and his eventual rejection of Johnson's lenient policy of Reconstruction. This pivotal period of Grant's career is frequently overlooked.
   
   But the focus of the book is on Grant's presidency. Bunting properly points out that with the exception of Abraham Lincoln and Franklin D. Roosevelt, no person faced greater challenges than did Grant in assuming the executive office. The country was seriously divided over Reconstruction, with the seemingly intractable goals of restoring the Union on the one hand and protecting the rights of African Americans on the other hand. Bunting praises Grant for the efforts he made to protect the rights of the freed people. With substantial justification, Bunting says that Grant's efforts were the strongest made by an American president until the mid-20th Century. Bunting also praises Grant for pursuing a relatively humane policy towards the Indians, for his courageous veto of inflationary paper money legislation in 1874, and for his calm and principled stance during the Hayes-Tilden controversy in the presidential election of 1876.
   
   Bunting does not overlook Grant's deficiencies as president, but I think he tends to downplay them. He acknowledges a substantial degree of moral obtuseness in Grant, if not personal culpability, in the manner in which the President responded to the scandals which plagued his administration. Grant showed a high degree of cronyism while in office and a tendency, derived from his success as a general, to be peremptory in has actions and judgments. On several occasions, Grant's policies and inactions led to economic difficulties, including the severe depression of 1873. Even in the area of Reconstruction and civil rights, Grant frequently compromised his efforts due to political considerations. And he was aware that the military presence in the South and the agressive Federal efforts to protect the rights of the freed people would need to end, due to lack of support in the nation, if not during his administration, then in the administration of his successor.
   
   Grant remained a revered figure during his lifetime. He probably could have been elected to a third term in 1876, had he wished, and he narrowly missed a renomination for president in 1880. Grant's Memoirs of his Civil War and Mexican War experiences, which he wrote towards the end of his life, is a classic of American literature.
   
   I think historians will debate the extent to which Bunting's work, and similar studies, serve to rehabilitate the presidency of Grant. But clearly, Bunting offers a fresh and thoughtful approach which will serve to modify the stereotypes that many informed Americans carry about him. Bunting's book offers a good introduction to a great, if enigmatic, American and to his difficult presidency.
   
   Robin Friedman



4. Ulysses S. Grant was a simple man (a "guy's guy" if you will) whose quiet, dignified leadership and composure helped the nation through some of the worst days of the Civil War. It seems odd really to think of a military commander (or a military man of any rank or position) to possess the qualities that Grant did. Humble. Straightforward. Sensitive. And yet he was all these things.
   
   He had to contend with the same horrors that Lincoln had to face: the most disruptive and bloody years the nation ever suffered through. And following the war (rather than accept retirement after having served) he accepted a call to the presidency, and with it, the challenges of Reconstruction. The simple statement, "Let us have peace," still echo down as a strong reminder to us, to those who never had the chance to meet him... Grant really was the right person for the times in which he passed.
   
   The author, Josiah Bunting III, deserves credit and our thanks for having written a very good book. It's language is engaging. As a reader, I never thought I'd be able to sit through pages of descriptive narration of battles, army movements and strategy. It was never really something I could stomach in any of my history classes, and yet Mr. Bunting had me at every move. I was fascinated and along for every moment of the ride.
   
   One can't help but be struck with the haunting realization that the Civil War was never a thing written in stone: it was avoidable. As with any other historical moment, it was something that came, something that followed the actions of other leaders (Franklin Pierce, Stephen Douglas, James Buchanan all spring to mind) who couldn't see that they were walking down a dangerous path. And yet, the war also lifted some men into national prominence: men of great character... men like U. S. Grant.



5. 
   This is one of two brief biographies of Grant (1822-1885) I recently read, the other written by Michael Korda and included among the volumes which comprise the Atlas Books/HarperCollins' "Eminent Lives" series, with James Atlas serving as general editor. Although both cover much of the same material, there are significant differences between their authors' respective approaches to the18th president of the United States.
   
   For example, Korda duly acknowledges the problems which awaited Grant after he was elected to his first term in 1869. "What did Grant's reputation as a president in, however, (and continues to do so today whenever journalists and historians are drawing up lists of the best presidents vs. the worst ones), was the depression of 1873, which ushered in a long period of unemployment and distress, made politically more damaging by accusations that the president's wealthy friends were making money out of it." Given that the United States was growing too fast, in too many different directions at once, and the inevitable consequence was corruption and an unstable economy, it would have taken a more astute man than Grant to slow things down or clean them up."
   
   It is soon obvious in this volume that Bunting disagrees with, indeed resents the fact that Grant is generally remembered "as a general, not a president, [which] explains in part the condescension - there is no better word for it -- from which pundits and historians have tended to write of him." Bunting asserts that if judged by the consequences of Grant's common sense, judgment, and intuition, his presidency, "so far from being one of the nation's worst, may yet be seen as one of the best."
   
   Korda indicates no inclination to view Grant's presidency as "one of the best." He duly acknowledges the problems which awaited Grant after he was elected to his first term in 1869. "What did Grant's reputation as a president in, however, (and continues to do so today whenever journalists and historians are drawing up lists of the best presidents vs. the worst ones), was the depression of 1873, which ushered in a long period of unemployment and distress, made politically more damaging by accusations that the president's wealthy friends were making money out of it." Given that the United States was growing too fast, in too many different directions at once, and the inevitable consequence was corruption and an unstable economy, "it would have taken a more astute man than Grant to slow things down or clean them up."
   
   This last observation by Korda is consistent with a contemporary assessment of Grant by the Edinburgh Review, one which Brooks Simpson quotes in his own study (Let Us Have Peace: Ulysses S. Grant and the Politics of War and Reconstruction 1861-1868), and which Bunting also cites: "To bind up the wounds left by the war, to restore concord to the still distracted Union, to ensure real freedom to the Southern Negro, and full justice to the southern white; these are indeed tasks which might tax the powers of Washington himself or a greater than Washington, if such a man is to be found."
   
   With all due respect to Grant's admirable personal qualities, I remain unconvinced by Bunting's eloquent but - in my judgment - problematic endorsement of Grant's
   leadership as president. The same "buck" that stops on a desk on a battlefield in Virginia also stops on a desk in the Oval Office.
   
   Those who share my high regard for this volume are urged to check out Korda's biography as well as Grant's Personal Memoirs. Both Korda and Bunting cite a number of other sources worthy of consideration.

3 comments about In His Own Words.

1. IN HIS OWN WORDS is perfect reading for history buffs. There are 545 pages of speeches, addresses and statements of Nelson Mandela. When you read this collection of words by Mr. Mandela, you come away with a better understanding of this man who has dedicated his life to his belief of freedom and equality.
   
   Nelson Mandela is a prolific writer as well as a gifted speaker. There are twelve chapters in IN HIS OWN WORDS. Because of its length, I suggest that you read this book by first reading the topics that most interest you. I started with Education, Health and Culture and was moved by Nelson Mandela's compassion and his tenacity to remain focused in his one man crusade for democracy for all people. As someone who enjoys reading about history, I read the remaining chapters over several weeks and found them to be fascinating. Very much worth reading.
   
   Vannie(~.~)
   Work & Family @ BellaOnline.com
   http://www.bellaonline.com/Site/workandfamily



2. Rebeccasreads highly recommends IN HIS OWN WORDS for those who have ever wondered how this man moved generations of people to agitate for civil rights. Settle down with this big, big book & relive the ideas that inspired us, & get a rare glimpse of the heroes from another time & another place.
   
   Because these are public speeches, there will be repetition - relax & let the words flow over you. & while most of us won't notice it, what we read from the book in no way indicates the timbre, cadence & nuances of the spoken word, so it would have been a wonderful completion had a DVD sound recording of one or two of Nelson Mandela's speeches been included.
   
   The extraordinary power of IN HIS OWN WORDS is in, once again, hearing legend's way of expressing himself, who, along with Mahatma Gandhi & Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., is one of the most articulate, courageous, & respected men of our time. The list of people who contributed their impressions is extraordinary, & illustrates how deeply Nelson Mandela changed our lives & our world.



3. This is a compilation of Nelson Mandela's speeches divided into twelve categories that run a diverse classification. The topics run the gamut of historical: "Struggle" "Freedom", "Reconciliation", "Nation Building" and "Development"; social: "Education", "Culture", "Religion", "Health" and "Children"; Cross sectional: "Heroes" and "Peace". The collection provides a one source to obtain the works of a key twentieth century person, but like any of these IN HIS OWN WORDS is repetitive and at times boring. Unless needed for a school assignment, this biographical oratory is best savored over several weeks as Mr. Mandela through his words show why he remains an inspirational influential individual whose speeches provide a deep insight into the man, the legend, and an era of transition.
   
   Harriet Klausner

5 comments about John F. Kennedy: A Biography.

1. The 1960 election was one of the closest. John Kennedy was Catholic, and many voters were against him for that reason. Kennedy's critics still question whether the Vietnam War would have been fought had Nixon won. It may not have been. On the other hand, there may have been a nuclear war. We will never know. It is part of the controversy of those years. Kennedy is remembered for his moon speech to Congress in 1961: "I believe this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the Earth." In 1962, Kennedy confronted Khrushchev over Cuba. The U.S. could not allow Soviet missiles 100 miles off the Florida coast. John Kennedy and First Lady Jackie brought an elegance to the White House emulated by successors Ronald and Nancy Reagan. Kennedy's assassination in Dallas in 1963 is something America is still dealing with, like Pearl Harbor before it and 9/11 after it. Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone when he assassinated Kennedy. Conspiracy theories are false. The grassy knoll is a figment of the imagination. Oswald was a loner and a misfit. He was a marksman. He shot Kennedy from the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository as his motorcade passed below. He fled and hid in a theater but was quickly apprehended. Jack Ruby shot and killed Oswald. He said he did it out of sympathy for Jackie. There was no reason not to believe him.



2. This great biography was written by an academic historian who gathers and compares several sources, yet the publisher to cut costs cuts the footnotes, which are of essential and greatest interest. In our era of intellectual property and knowledge as commodity, the publisher did not wish to provide the reader with specific indications for further study through the footnotes. With the collapse of the Internet we may never know what amplifications and insights the author may have included in these footnotes, which were no doubt as exhaustive as the work itself. How could the once great St. Martin's have been so academically irresponsible for commercial purposes? It is as inexplicable as our once great nation's journey from the intelligent JFK to the solipsistic W.



3. I read this book after reading the Caro series on Lyndon Johnson and this book fell short of my expectations. I felt that too many facts and stories where thrown together without a supporting theme or purpose. Also, I thought a disproportionate amount of time was spent on Kennedy's private life.



4. Michael O'Brien is to be commended for writing a lengthy, well-written tome at this late juncture on the late, great JFK, especially post-Robert Dallek's masterful "An Unfinished Life", a VERY hard act to follow, indeed. O'Brien's book is a worthy companionn to Dallek's and, while it treads a lot of familiar ground, it is worthwhile for all Kennedy fans. Get this!



5. Michael O'Brien's magisterial book offers a necessary rejoinder to the "Dark Side of Camelot" school of thought. While still criticizing Kennedy's reckless behavior, O'Brien presents Kennedy as a thoughtful and engaged politician with tangible accomplishments including arms control, civil rights, and tax policy. O'Brien explains how political realities limited Kennedy's ability to implement more liberal policies.
   
   O'Brien aims for a comprehensive understanding of Kennedy and his political work, which includes addressing past writers. Consequently his length is understandable. Non-academic readers will appreciate that the book is not cluttered by footnotes, but scholars may find them on a website.

5 comments about Lion in the White House: A Life of Theodore Roosevelt.

1. I recently finished "Lion in the White House", referring to President Theodore Roosevelt.
   While I have read many other books about this fascinating man, "Lion in the White House" is a compilation of other books and extensive research. It is an excellent and concise documentary of events and personalities of the time. A very easy read.



2. It would be pointless for me to criticize this book for being too short, because it was obviously intended to be a quick read that provided an overview of Teddy Roosevelt's life. And it did that. Yes I would have liked to hear more about Roosevelt's insatiable oldest daughter, among other topics, but for the most part, I got what I wanted out of the book.
   
   I had never read a TR book before, and I want to read McCullough's "Mornings on Horseback" at some point soon. I felt that to prepare for that book, which does not cover TR's entire life, I needed some background on the man. And "Lion in The White House" provided that.
   
   This is the kind of book that you can read in a week and get an understanding of what Roosevelt's goals were as a politician, and what drove him to be as progressive as he was. It did whet my appetite for a more detailed study of the man. But this time, I wasn't looking for a 700-page or multi-volume monstrosity, so I'm glad Donald's book was on the shelf. As long as your expectations are for a short overview of TR, you will be pleased with this book. If you're looking for great depth and detail, you should look elsewhere.



3. This is not my period so I cannot attest to any of the specific details. I was simply looking at background on Roosevelt as a writer of American History. Besides Winston Churchill I can think of no easier subject for a short biography and the book does capture many of Roosevelt's accomplishments. However, this book is stunningly badly written and edited. And this is not simply the gratuitous digs at today's Republicans as noted by other reviewers. I cannot figure out how it received so many endorsements from renowned History professors. I understand that a short book on such a rich subject may lead to gaps - but there are so many gaps, jumps, incomplete thoughts and non sequiturs that it makes reading the book a jarring experience. In addition, Donald has a quirky and idiosyncratic way with the language.
   Such criticisms clearly require supportive examples.
   In terms of key issues being broached but never explored, Donald describes Roosevelt's run for Governor as follows: "Besides the trial with Platt as an obstacle to his progress, there was Edith's reluctance to re-enter public life. She soon became enthusiastic and even went to the State convention, held in Saratoga, New York, on September 27." P107 The phrasing of the first sentence is decidedly odd. Then we find that Edith's reluctance miraculously disappears though previously it was an obstacle on a level with the opposition of apparently the most powerful political boss in the New York Republican Party.
   Other examples of Donald's odd phrasing include: "The new president did not throw caution to the winds, but boldly tacked in domestic and foreign afairs." P134
   Then there is repetition: On pages 131 and 155, where Dr. Donald uses exactly the same quotes about lynching.
   Then there is the sheer lack of clarity when Donald describes the complexities of New York politics and Roosevelt's need for support for his re-election as President:
   "He(Roosevelt) also watched as two rival Republicans, Boss Platt and Benjamin Barker Odell, a rising politician, fought for control of the Republican Party. Odell found that Platt had lied to him and would not be his ally.
   "During the struggle, Platt told Roosevelt that he would favor him continuing on as president, but Roosevelt did not put much stock in this because he thought Platt, who was not well, would be more likely to follow him than would Roosevelt." Page 141
   Clearly there is something wrong here. An editor would have helped clear it up!!
   Another disappointment was cursory examination of how and why Roosevelt ran again for President. But perhaps by then I was too jarred to follow Dr. Donald's line of reasoning.
   Fortunately for Dr. Donald, her book is saved by the brilliance of Roosevelt.



4. When one writes a book or an article, one must first decide the audience for that work. The serious student of Theodore Roosevelt will be disappointed with this book as it contains nothing new. It is merely a precis of TR's life, from beginning to end. While reading this book the question "Why?" entered my mind many times. Why was it written? Why were certain parts highlighted and others ignored?
   
   For example, when Roosevelt returned from Cuba after the Spanish-American War, he flirted with the idea of running for governor of New York. His wife did not relish the idea. She eventually changed her mind, but the reader is not told why: "Besides his trial with [Thomas C.]Platt as an obstacle to his progress [in gaining the nomination], there was Edith's reluctance to reenter public life. She soon became enthusiastic and even went to the state convention..." (107). Were bargains made with Edith? Why did she change her mind? If that fact is important enough to mention, a better explanation as to her turnaround should have been forthcoming. There was also a lack of credit for some quotes in the book. Mark Hanna, the Ohio senator who was against TR becoming vice-president, was mentioned in several places. Yet, his most famous quote, "Now that damned cowboy is in the White House!" (after McKinley's assassination) is merely credited to "...an anti-Roosevelt Republican" (130).
   
   In a book filled with excerpts from Roosevelt letters and speeches, some of his best speeches and quotes are left out. His 1915 speech to the NYC Knights of Columbus where he dismisses "hyphenated Americans," is not mentioned. For a book published in 2007, one could argue for inclusion of the entire text of that speech. Also, while discussing the assassination attempt on TR during the 1912 presidential campaign, his famous line, "It takes more than that to kill a Bull Moose," is omitted.
   
   Clearly this is an abbreviated history of a long, event-filled life. This work does not do that life justice. Considering the lifetime of work by the author, one has to wonder if she penned the book only to add to the list of her accomplishments. Moreover, the lack of a serious bibliography and the absence of notes calls into question the academic validity of this work. It would have been better had it not been written in the first place.
   
   It was awarded three stars because it would be fitting as an introduction to the twenty-sixth president. Its prose flows well and is easy to read. Since the curious reader will want to find out more about Roosevelt, it would be recommended to a middle school student as a way to become familiar with one of America's great icons. Those who are beyond that stage should look to other sources for an in-depth education about Theodore Roosevelt.



5. For the many people who admire Theodore Rossevelt for his belief that corporations have a civic responsiblity to American citizens, new books on this icon of progressivism are always welcome. It is important, however, to temper one's affection for TR with expectations of scholarship, and when one does so, Donald's book fails to satisfy. Compared to the Morris two-volume biography, Donald's book lacks sufficient detail to be classified as a legitimate biography; instead, it seems to be a simple encomium. Serious readers will not learn anything that they did not already know about TR, and they may be offended by the book's shallow treatment. This book might be suitable for a junior high student as an introduction to TR, but it has little merit for a more adult audience.

No comments about Herbert Hoover: The American Presidents Series: The 31st President, 1929-1933 (The American Presidents).

1 comments about Theodore Roosevelt: Preacher of Righteousness.

1. The book is more technical than I had anticipated. More appropriate for "scholars" not someone who enjoys reading as a hobby.

5 comments about Mr. Jefferson's Women.

1. Thomas Jefferson is one of the most troubling characters among America's founding fathers. He penned the immortal ideals of freedom and equality in the Declaration of Independence. We, from our modern perspective, also like the fact that he was an intellectual and that he brought refreshing informality to the White House. In recent years, his reputation has been tarnished by re-examination of his disturbing political tendencies. (See for example, John Adams and Negro President: Jefferson and the Slave Power). This book provides additional insights into Jefferson's character by examining his relation to the women in his life, and the insights add more tarnish to Jefferson's reputation that go beyond the understandably archaic attitudes that might belong to a man of his time. As clearly documented here, "all men created equal" applied no more to women than to blacks in Jefferson's mind. Each woman discussed here provides additional perspective. As to the Sally Hemings controversy, Kukla carefully lays out enough circumstantial details to undermine the most strident doubter.
   
   A fine book, worthy of a wider audience.



2. I really enjoyed reading this book. The author wrote it in a way that both educates and compells you to read more. I found it hard to put down. My favorite parts were very personal, real-life events that made Mr. Jefferson even more real to me. My favorite is, during his presidency, an account of his chosen attire while welcoming a Rep. of the British King. He was wearing well worn slippers that he tossed around on his toes (priceless!). I also found the additional quotes and excerpts of letters from people such as Abigail Adams and others a welcome addition. Kudos to the author for such an insighful, wonderful, well thought out book about Jefferson and the various forms of relationships with women during his life.



3. Just when you thought you had read everything...Jon Kukla presents a very readable portrait of Jefferson's "relationships" with women--which leads to new insights about this great man--and, more interestingly, his attitudes towards women in general. The final chapters about his broader view of women as a threat to republican government place Jefferson in the context of his time. There is a remarkable discussion of Jefferson and Abigail Adams' letters. The book is eminently fair about Sally Hemings and gives a new meaning to the notion that "all men are created equal". Thank you, Jon Kukla, for beginning a lively conversation that is well worth your engagement.



4. Why does even the prospect that Jefferson was with Sally Hemings bother you so much ?



5. There is not a scintilla of evidence linking Thomas Jefferson with Sally Hemings and her brood.Nature magazine TIMIDLY "corrected" itself for its faux pas in 1999, however, the media has continued to ignore the fact that there is NO EVIDENCE.Kukla just capitalizes on the public's juvenille tendency to support these ficto-spectacles,P.T.Barnum was correct about "suckers."

5 comments about The Virtues of Aging (Library of Contemporary Thought).

1. Simple, plain, clear good advice enlived by personal example and story. This is a good book about aging wisely, retaining one's powers as best as one can through the senior years. Former President Carter involuntarily forced to retire at fifty- six faced a double - crisis , identity and financial. He almost lost the family land and farm, but was saved when his peanut holdings were bought by a large consortium. He and his wife Rosalyn became active in new ways, as university teachers, writers, volunteer builders of one home for a needy person each year.
   The Carter recipe for enjoying old age involves remaining active, continuing to interact with others, exercising, avoiding the well- known evils of cigarettes and excess drinking.
   Carter recognizes that not everyone has the prerogatives of a former President but he maintains that most of us have the resources to go on enjoying life in old age.
   It seems to me Carter is a lot wiser in this work than he is in many of his political writings.
   This is a good book and has valuable tips which should help towards graceful aging.



2. THE VIRTUES OF AGING by Jimmy Carter
   February 25, 2006
   
   Amazon Rating: ****
   
   
   
   In THE VIRTUES OF AGING, President Jimmy Carter writes about what a senior citizen can do to feel fulfilled and productive in ones last stage of life. As usual, he is quite candid as he writes about his own life, his marriage to Rosalyn, and recounts stories about his family and friends. I always enjoy reading Carter's non-fiction, as he always has some interesting anecdotes, as well as some wisdom-filled stories that he passes on to his readers. Carter never preaches, and I for one appreciate it. In fact, in this particular book he admits (at the end) that he tried to refrain from quoting much from the bible, as he felt it would detract from the topic. But since the church is a big part of his life, he did talk about his own participation with his church and did quote a few times in appropriate places as he discussed issues on aging.
   
   I have to admit I'm rather biased because I have always admired the work Jimmy Carter has done since his presidency. Knowing about the good works he's done in the past few decades, I do not find it difficult at all to see that he's also left his mark in his writings. He's shared with the world what he has learned through his own past experiences as a son, a father, and grandfather, as well as Governor and President of the United States. I'm slowly collecting all of his books and so far have enjoyed what I have read. THE VIRTUES OF AGING was not as structured as some of his other books have been, but I don't think it was meant to be. It is a collection of thoughts and ramblings of aging gracefully, from his point of view.



3. Jimmy Carter used to be my favorite ex-president. Now, it seems he has aged beyond the point at which he can reason clearly. He goes on Larry King to criticize a former colleague (Zell Miller) for standing in support of the President, AND writes a book, for which he will probably make millions of dollars, to do more of the same. He is using his roles as elder statesman (well-deserved) and Nobel Laureate (well-deserved) to undermine our country; but seems to have forgotten that he was impotent while our hostages were held in Iran for 444 days. You know the saying: "them what can't do, teach". If one of the virtues of aging is exploitation of public opinion for your own advantage (or that of your party), Jimmy Carter is VERY virtuous.



4. I'm in my mid-40's and found this book a facinating
   look at older age. Carter busts the old stereotypes
   about sitting in the rocking chair during retirement age and mentions numerous examples of friends and associates in the 70's and 80's who are living enormously productive lives. This book
   gives me hope for the future. Even though my last 45 years were probably a little easier than my next 45 will, I find solace in the many examples of warm relationships maintained, hobbies developed and new challenges in later life. A whole-hearted endorsement for this book.

   Carter is my favorite former US President.

   The book also gave me a great curiousity to look at more information on the Carter Center and Habitat for Humanity.

   Jeffrey McAndrew
   broadcaster and author of "Our Brown-Eyed Boy"1




5. "The Virtues of Aging," by former United States President Jimmy Carter, is a down-to-earth nonfiction book about growing old gracefully. Carter mixes interesting statistics with autobiographical information and practical advice.

   Carter discusses his work and experiences with a number of organizations, such as Habitat for Humanity. He also discusses the lives of people who made extraordinary accomplishments in their senior years. Carter doesn't shy away from sensitive topics, such as senior sexuality or preparing for one's own death.

   One admirable characteristic of Carter's writing is that while it is informed by his own Christian faith, he is also respectful of other belief traditions. Overall, he writes like an unpretentious friend who is sharing his life experience and perspective. Throughout the book, his wife Rosalynn is a constant presence; you get a real sense of the solidity of that relationship.