5 comments about The Crusader: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism.

1. As long as you are not prejudiced or politically bigoted, it makes little difference if you are liberal, conservative, Democrat or Republican as you cogitate purchasing Dr. Paul Kengor's work, CRUSADER, Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism. The treatment is built on such solid research credentials, that it would be adolescent to dismiss it as another conservative woo-woo tabloid.
   
   Before I read it, I had not encountered any information about Dr. Kengor that would trigger speculation regarding his conservative perspective. I thought that he had approached his subject objectively. 'A fair-minded liberal could have written this,' I thought. Now, after discovering his political bent, and what he could have said but didn't, I am thoroughly convinced of his objectivity. He must have had to work hard at it. His scholarship speaks for itself.
   
   There is much sappy literature available in the bookstores on both sides of the liberal/conservative debate. This is not one of those books. If you want an engaging, supportable and honest interpretation of history, this work has it. If you want a straight-up appraisal of Reagan's presidency and his impact on the Soviets and communism, this work has it.
   
   Ronald Reagan was not a god, but he did the work of one. Dr. Kengor shows us how in a definitive work that will likely go down as the most significant work on President Reagan in political literature.
   
   Paul D. Morris



2. Ronald Reagan is one of the rare figures in history who transcends political ideology. Often portrayed as more communicator than true statesman, The Crusader presents a far different picture. Paul Kengor does a masterful work of combining Reagan's own words with seldom published source material. The picture that develops is of a man who truly believed communism was evil and dedicated the later part of his life to seeing its downfall.
   
   Since President Reagan's death, more and more historians have begun to change their opinion of his effectiveness and influence as leader of the free world. No matter what your political leanings, The Crusader is a fine example of historical writing done right.



3. I have been a supporter of Ronald Reagan since his first run for the Presidency in 1976. I learned things about President Reagan that I did not know before reading this book. Most notably, this book details and documents just how President Reagan was in charge of his agenda, notwithstanding the best efforts of the American left to portray him otherwise, particularly the defeat and destruction of the Soviet Union.
   
   The book is extremely well written and is a page turner from the first chapter on. This is a must read for any fan of the greatest president of the last century. Reagan haters and deniers will want to avoid this book so as not to have to confront real history and all its implications.



4. The late President Reagan's crusade against Communism in Russia freed millions of innocent people around the world, and in the end made the world a much better place when he died.
   
   History will record that Reagan was one of the greatest presidents in American history, and we should all take his example in both moral leadership, and courageousness.
   
   All future American leaders should look to Reagan as an example of honesty, sacrifice, and fortitude for taking on the problems of the 21rst century.
   
   God rest the soul of President Ronald Reagan, and may God bless America.



5. If there was ever a book showing that one person can make a difference, it is "The Crusader," by Paul Kengor. It is amazing how many times Ronald Reagan went against the advice of most if not all of his advisors, and in the end proved to be correct.(Most advisors did not want Reagan to tell Garbachev to "tear down this wall," during his now famous speech.)
   Today, President Bush often gets criticized for unilateral inclinations. The book shows that Ronald Reagan was the unilateralsit of all unilateralists. It was even humorous to read how Reagan would go through the motions during his cabinet meetings and often in press conferences, while at the same time he had this whole separate operation going on to bring down the Soviet Union, that very few, even very few of his cabinet members, knew about. Can anyone say leader? It also shows, that even though Reagan was calling the shots, how important Bill Casey and Bill Clark were to the entire operation.
   This is the best book I have read on Ronald Reagan, and the best book that I have read on the process that actually ended the Cold War.
   It really does put the final nail in the coffin for those clueless "intellectuals" who say that the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, and even the Berlin Wall would have fallen anyway. The book gives an amazingly detailed step by step account of the economic war against the Soviets and all of the National Security Decision Directives that Reagan virtually single-handedly initiated.
   The book shows that Ronald Reagan would often go against conventional wisdom. For example, he had great disdain for the Yalta agreements, and for the policy of containment, and eventually, virtually reversed them.
   The book also shows how Reagan's anti-communist passions go way back in his life, and how those sentiments are based on his respect for the human being. It tells of a time when he was in East Germany and saw a lady shopper accosted by an East German guard, and how this incident and others firmed his resolve against the evil of communism. It is pointed out how Reagan was actually motivated to act when others weren't, and how Reagan had an inborn sense of the right thing to do. And the book shows that Reagan's pattern to rescue those in distress goes back to his early days when saved 77 people over 7 summers from the swift currents of the Rock River in Dixon Illinois.
   "The Crusader" goes into great detail about the relationship between President Reagan and the great Pope John Paul II, and his role in bringing down communism. And it details Reagan's great admiration for the Polish people, and how they admired him in return, and how Poland's Solidarity Movement was one of the major factors in Reagan's and the Pope's effort to bring down communism. And how the people of Poland, the rest of Eastern Europe, and the Soviet Union gave great credit to Reagan for bringing them freedom.
   The book also details how Reagan brought freedom to Central and South America.
   Before I read "The Crusader," I thought that President Ronald Reagan was our greatest U.S. President. After reading the book, my opinion of him only improved. In fact, he and Pope John Paul II have to be two of the great men of the millenium.
   It was often said that Reagan had very few, if any, close friends, except Nancy. Probably my favorite story in the book was when, in 1989, just before the previously unimaginable free elections in Poland, Reagan welcomed two members of Solidarity and the two Polish Americans who were hosting them, to his office in California. Reagan pointed to a picture of Pope John Paul II on his office wall and said: "He is my best friend. Yes, you know I am a Protestant, but he's still my best friend." If you are going to have a best friend, not a bad on to have. Thankyou.
   
   Mark S.Robertson
   Independence, Mo.

1 comments about Abraham Lincoln, Slavery, and the Civil War.

1. FOR ME THIS WAS A PAGE TURNER. I FELT LIKE I WAS THERE AT THE TIME THESE LETTERS AND SPEECHES WERE WRITTEN. VERY EASY TO GET LOST IN THE TIME PERIOD. IF YOU LOVE THIS SUBJECT, YOU'LL ENJOY THIS BOOK.

No comments about Margaret Thatcher - The Iron Lady (Biography).

5 comments about Present at the Creation: My Years in the State Department.

1. I rememeber doing a 60-page research paper on Dean Acheson while I was an undergraduate at UCLA; and this book was one of the primary sources of material that I used in my research. The book is a fascinating insight into a man who before, and during the Cold War, was truly 'Present at the Creation.' Dean Acheson was Harry Truman's Secretary of State during one of the most tumultuous periods in American history. As secretary of state, he was one of the primary movers who helped shape and guide the nation's foreign policy for many years to come. Dean Acheson was not only one of the most important men during this postwar period, but as one who helped shape a major part of this country's policies; and he gives a fascinating insight into the policies and decision makers in the government.
   
   In the book, Dean Acheson describes how decisions were made and then eventually implemented. The book, which is Acheson's memoirs of his years in the state department is not dry; but instead a very insightful a engaging read. If you are interested in politics, or history, and wonder how decisions were made that impacted the American foreign policies during the Cold War, then this book is an important read. Moreover, what he discusses in the book has not changed at all in terms of how the government goes about implemeting polices, and those who try and thwart the process: either through political gain or ignorance. Or in some cases a little bit of both.
   
   You might ask yourself, "Why should I care about this man, and his memoirs?" Well the answer would be [from me anyway] that the polices he helped shape are with us today. [Many anyway]. The political structure of the postwar period was primarily designed to contain communism. And as such, the creation of NATO was one of the most important decisions enacted during the cold war era. His insistence [along with Truman] that Western Europe had to be revived and restructered as a thwart to Soviet Russia is an extremely important chapter in our nations history. This book is highly recommended, and belongs in your library.



2. I respect that this book has a Pulitzer for History, and it has a wealth of information for scholars, but for the lay reader, it is too long by 100 pages or so and goes into minute governmental procedures and such, obscuring the good parts of the book. Acheson manages to be hawkish, critical of both parties, but makes a lot of sense too about containment, and realistically looking at the Soviets. I take his comments with a grain of salt, as this is part memoir and apologia. I would have liked to see more of his take on the years after Truman's presidency. And yes, this book did help me appriciate Truman's character more.



3. A generally enjoyable and interesting book. I hold Dean Acheson in very high regard along with Harry Truman and George Marshall. As other reviewers have stated, those three men (and several others) initiated policies that shaped world history for the next 50 years.
   
   That said, the most fascinating aspect of the book for me was the back-stabbing, political posturing, stonewalling, and unresponsiveness that Acheson described throughout all the various government bureaucracies (both foreign and domestic) - Congress, the Defense Department, Foreign Ministries, Treasury, etc. It drives home to the reader just how difficult it is to get ANYTHING done in government! And it also reminds the reader that the political animosity and disfunction we see in modern government isn't a new phenomenon at all...



4. Dean Acheson, one of "The Wise Men" who crafted foreign policy from Truman to Johnson, was a great American. I assume it could be debated just how correct our Cold War policy was, but we're all still here to debate the point so that in itself says volumes. President Truman was wise indeed for the trust and extreme confidence that he placed in Dean Acheson. Great reading!



5. I'm a 16 year old sophmore in high school and have an interest in all history, especially history that took place during the 1930's to around 1965. this book gave very deep and detailed insight into the inerworkings of the stae department after world war 2, and displayed the type of men it took to rebuild governments around the world into well oiled democratic machines. i would HIGHLY reccomend this book to anyone interested in learning a great deal about the state department under truman and acheson, as well as a person just interested in a good read.

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

1. 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.



2. 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.



3. 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.



4. 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...



5. Publisher's Weekly is entirely mistaken, in their comments above, in suggesting that Sir Winston Churchill once belonged to the Labour Party.
   
   He never did, of course.
   
   Churchill did, however, cross the floor to join the Liberal Party, often making common cause there with his Liberal ally David Lloyd George. He left the Liberals and returned to the Conservative Party (at first, as a "Constitutionalist") in the 1920's...
   
   Alan D. Hyde

5 comments about Jefferson's Secrets: Death and Desire at Monticello.

1. The good stuff in this book is invaluable to anyone with a serious interest in Jefferson. I'd award five stars for such unique scholarship, but I've subtracted two stars as a rebuke to the author and to his editors, if there were any, for perverse self-indulgence. The readability of "Jefferson's Secrets" is damaged by its repetitiousness; Burstein even repeats the same quotations from Jefferson's letters in three and four chapters, without significantly adding to his exegesis. But a more serious flaw is Burstein's rhapsodic admiration of Jefferson's mind at the same time that he protrays the man as a consummate hypocrite and egotist--not only a slave-owner and unreconstructed racist but an exploiter of servants to the point of callously making one his concubine, a Jacobin in rhetoric who lived in the style of an ancien regime aristocrat, a man who gave his daughters a decorous education yet maintained that women had no claim to equality. Burstein's defense seems to be that we should forgive Jefferson's inconsistencies because he was conflicted, and a man of his times. Indeed, the central theme of the book is to demonstrate exactly how Jefferson was a man of his times, whose world-view was shaped by the ideas and particularly the scientific knowledge of the Enlightenment. That's the good stuff, the analysis of what Jefferson himself thought he meant by what he said and wrote, given the "vocabulary" of his time and place. However, in the next breath Burstein proceeds to declare that Jefferson was in some sense the first Modern Man, a harbinger of Romanticism precisely because of his ambiguities, the very same ambiguities that Burstein has just dispelled. Really, Professor Burstein, it seems to be YOU who are conflicted, by your adulation of the "timeless" Jefferson even while you pin the human Jefferson to the cultural matrix of his lifetime!



2. There is next to nothing here that caught my interest. I was looking forward very much to this work, and I was extremely disappointed in it. I had just finished an excellent biography of John Adams, which impelled me to try this one. I can only recommend that you don't waste your time. Every moment on this book was, to me, a complete waste of time.



3. Thomas Jefferson was a great and brilliant, but flawed and unconventional man. What can the zillionth book add that hasn't already been said? Quite a lot. It should not be anybody's first book on Jefferson, but it should be everybody's second, or third. Of course, Burstein hasn't got Jefferson "figured out", but neither does anyone else.....
   
   This wonderful volume focuses on Mr. Jefferson's later years, and does give us a good view of his thought processes. Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, and Jefferson can be quoted to "prove" ANYTHING. "Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate than that this people are to be free,..." The inscription on the wall of the Jefferson Memorial ends with a period, but look up the rest of the quote. I use the comma deliberately. He who said that "All men are created equal" also had things to say about the orangutang. And he also had sex with his slave, Sally? Well...maybe. In any event, he documented his views on this subject, too, complete with charts. The ongoing arguement with John Marshall gets coverage, too. It has been more completely documented elsewhere, but Burstein does an excellent job. This feud is truly one of the most profound topics in American history. It spanned from their early years till the day Jefferson died, and beyond, going from a rivalry, to disagreement, to blind, unreasoning, hatred after the Aaron Burr treason case of 1807. My own opinion is that the cause of the whole mess was multifaceted, involving familial, personal, political, and philosophical elements. {Not religious; they agreed about that} In this battle of giants, we have the origin of the Civil War, and of much of our political conflict today. An athiest who "swore on the altar of God"? This is covered, too. Jefferson may not have been orthodox, but he was assuradely not an athiest. A slave owner who hated slavery? Not unusual...the same is true of George Washington, Patrick Henry, John Marshall, George Wythe, and Robert E. Lee. {Lee inherited his slaves, and freed them before he had to}. A word of caution; though some of the founding fathers did not believe in slavery, they certainly did not believe in Black equality, either.
   
   Andrew Burstein has produced a superb work. As I said, NOT a first book on the subject, but an essential one. For a first book, see Joseph Ellis, or Noble Cunningham. Dumas Malone is, of course, definitive, but few will mine the gold in those six profound volumes.



4. Burstein has written an insightful book on the Jefferson, as he says, that has usually been ignored by many other historians, i.e. in the period after his presidency. Specifically, Burstein analyzes the thoughts and attitudes held by Jefferson on life, the role of women and slaves in society, religion, freedom of thought, politics and other topics. The Jefferson that emerges from Burstein's study is a multi-faceted man who both inspires awe for his intelligence and his abilities but also sets him in place as a creature of his time, especially concerning the issue of slavery.
   
   Burstein is especially keen on observing Jefferson's use of words to convey his inner most feelings and thoughts. He is especially observant of the medical terminology that Jefferson uses in discussing many different subjects. As Burstein mentioned, he usually didn't give his correspondent everything he was looking for in terms of revealing his innermost thoughts and secrets. After his presidency, Jefferson preferred a retreat from the public sphere and generally guarded his privacy. But we do get to understand Jefferson's devotion to his family, his sometimes very contradictory statements on human liberty and freedom especially when juxtaposed against the very present institution of slavery, his views on republican government and many other areas that he expounded on.
   
   There are friends, family members, well-known politicians, doctors, thinkers and others who emerge in Burstein's book, mainly through the correspondence that Burstein uses to help bring light to the elusive aspects of Jefferson's attitudes and sensibilities. The controversies surrounding Jefferson and the institution of slavery are discussed, especially concerning the generally accepted sexual relationship with Sally Hemings, with interesting insights by Burstein on Jefferson's attitudes on sexual relationships, racial differences and so forth. Though he would be considered a racist today, he was a creature of his time, with an odd, but seemingly well-thought out view of the nature of the races (not that his view was right).
   
   Burstein really does try to understand the foundations of Jefferson's inner beliefs and sensibilities. Jefferson was a devotee to the rights of man (though this didn't include everyone in his day), his family (he was especially close to his granddaughter Ellen), and the principles of republican government. Interestingly, despite his advocacies, he often turned to others to make the effort to combat his political opponents, we see this in his wanting to combat the histories written by such Federalists as Chief Justice Marshall.
   
   The reader will get to see snippets of the inner Jefferson in this book. Burstein, as he stated he wanted to accomplish, succeeds fairly well in presenting the living Jefferson as opposed to the dying Jefferson, though we do read of the effects of aging and other health issues that gradually took their toll on his physical body. We see the many facets of this highly intelligent human being who was such an influence in his day and through his words, actions and ideals continues to be to the present. The debates go on.



5. Jefferson has now fallen into the same category as Lincoln: given the zillions of books already written about him, what is there left to add? Burstein's previous book on TJ ("The Inner Jefferson") established that he had quite a lot to contribute to the literature, much of it quite unique in perspective. The same is certainly true of this volume as well.
   
   The focus here is on the retired Jefferson (1809-1826), and much of the author's material is drawn from TJ's private papers after leaving office. One of Burstein's great virtues--perhaps his greatest virtue--is that he looks for unique aspects not generally already addressed by other historians. For example, the impact of "time and mortality" on TJ's thought; his medical concerns and how these concerns are reflected in the unique vocabulary of the 18th Century (e.g., what is the meaning of "sensation"?); and whether there is something to learn about his political views from looking at these issues. Similarly, how did he conceive of "nature"?
   
   Burstein also looks at that perennial issue of TJ and slavery, including an interesting chapter on "sex with a servant" in an effort to probe that relationship. Did TJ's affinity for the ancient Greeks impact on his relationship with Sally Hemmings?--this is the kind of issue that only Burstein would explore. The most fascinating section I found dealt with Jefferson's efforts to get favorable history written so that his record would remain untarnished after his death. I am not quite sure anyone else has dealt with this issue. Finally, the topic is TJ and dying, which ends up focusing upon TJ's religious orientation during this period. Burstein's research is, as usual, prodigious as he searches for evidence to support his interpretations. While a great deal of speculation and imaginative thinking are at work here, Burstein continues to generate scintillating and provocative work that is highly unique and valuable. While one may not always agree with his interpretations, the process of considering them continues to be of substantial value.

5 comments about Mao Zedong: A Life (A Penguin Life).

1. Jonathan Spence is probably the leading Western scholar on Chinese history, and for that reason alone this book is worth reading. Spence provides the reader with a concise overview of Mao's life with an appropriate amount of commentary on issues that help the reader understand Mao's personality. This focus on Mao as a person (instead of Mao as an historical actor) is, in my opinion, the book's strongest feature.
   
   I'd like to spend a second or two dealing with what some of the other reviewers of this book have said, because I think several of them have missed the mark. Some people seem to be disquieted because Spence spends so little time covering the historical aspects of major events, such as the Long March, the Great Leap Forward, and the Cultural Revolution. However, the point of this book is not to give a detailed account of Mao's role in modern Chinese history, but rather to provide an image of Mao that readers can get their hands around. Spence accomplishes this task nicely, and reviewers misunderstand his purpose when they criticize this book for its lack of coverage of such important events.
   
   Another set of reviewers are disillusioned with the book because they feel it does not adequately show how Mao went from a middle-peasantry childhood to become the leader of China. I don't know what these reviewers think the book is missing in particular; I think Spence does a good job of capturing the essence of Mao's life through time, and Spence stops at each categorical change in Mao's life to explain what was going on that led to Mao's upward shift in stature.
   
   I give this book three stars because I think it is a book without a definable demographic in terms of readership. The content is too surface-level to be of much use to even the moderately informed Chinese history student. At the same time, Spence's sense of irony and paradox will probably be lost on the novice reader because of a lack of contextual understanding. Additionally, Spence leaves unexplained things that not all readers will understand (such as the role of various political bodies that get brought up). So it is that, in my opinion, this book is at times too advanced for the novice, and yet generally too introductory for the more experienced.
   
   I myself didn't learn a whole lot about Mao's life that I didn't already know. Spence's scholarship is very good, however, and there were a decent amount of details that I didn't know beforehand which I found interesting. Spence is very even-handed in terms of moral judgement, which is an important distinction between this book and others that present Mao as either a Saint/Savior or an Antichrist. As a concise biography I think Spence accomplished the worthy task of providing an image of Mao that readers can understand, and on that basis I would recommend this book to people looking to get a better feel for Mao the person.



2. As leader of China for over a quarter of a century, Mao Zedong is one of the dominant figures of modern history, one whose shadow continues to fall on his country today. In this book, Jonathan Spence offers a short introduction to the Chinese leader's life and times, one that seeks to explain how the son of Hunan farmers became the ruler of the most populous country in the world.
   
   That Spence succeeds is a tribute to his command of the subject. He concentrates on Mao's intellectual development, analyzing his writings in order to shed light upon the key points in his life. Spence sees Mao's organizational skills as key to his rise within the Communist Party during the hard years of the 1920s and 1930s. Once in power, Mao consolidated his rule behind an image of himself as the simple, determined leader of a revolutionary movement, an image he sought to impose on the movement as a whole. Yet his increasingly absolute position fueled a self-absorption that, once in power, contributed to the great disasters of his rule.
   
   One of the leading historians of China, Spence presents the details of Mao's life with confidence and erudition. While much of the treatment is perfunctory (what else is to be expected in a biography of less than 200 pages?), within the space available he provides a good overview of Mao's life intertwined with coverage of the complex and dramatic history of twentieth century China. For readers seeking to learn about the interesting times which Mao shaped, this is a good place to start.



3. "The American moon and the Chinese moon are the same moon" noted Mao - the American moon was not BETTER. This is my first book on Mao and the way in which Mr Spence underpins this brief overview of Mao's life with examples of Mao's poetry and philosophy adds to understanding of this hugely significant figure in the World's history. The descent into senility (for want of a better term} and the confirmation once again of the dictum power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, are sad perhaps even tragic conclusions to what began as a noble inspirational life. An enjoyable, informative and concise read.



4. If you going to attempt a 180 page biography of someone of this stature, one must sift thru and present only the most relevent and important details. This did not happen. A decent book, but lacked details on some very important areas, while giving too much time to unrealted topics. Example: Mao becomes the head of a small, isolated band of communist guerilla fighters. Very well, now how does he transform from that, into the head of state for a billion people? the book doesnt say. In this biogarphy, Mao goes from that cave-living nobody into meeting Stalin and ruling China in about 2 paragraphs. From cave-dweller to world leader in 6 sentences. We get more than 6 sentences about his last secretary's personal life.



5. Only about two hundred pages, Jonathan Spence does a very noble job summarizing one of the most powerful, mysterious, fascinating, and frightening persons of the twentieth century. Though if one is looking for a book that goes into detail about any aspect of Mao's life or policies, it is best to look elsewhere. This book is a straightforward and unabashed introduction and quick overview of Mao's life and work and ideas. Perfect for people curious about Mao and twentieth century China who want to read more than an abstract, but do not necessarily need or want to tackle a big and detailed work. Just the facts and little commentary. Spence does a good job balancing any bias against or for Mao and his policies and deals mostly with the reasons for them and overall consequences.

5 comments about Beyond the White House: Waging Peace, Fighting Disease, Building Hope.

1. Pulitzer Prize winner and former President Jimmy Carter presents his memoir/retrospective on twenty-five years of humanitarian work in Beyond the White House: Waging Peace, Fighting Disease, Building Hope, now available in an unabridged audiobook on CD with tracks every three minutes for easy bookmarking. Narrated by Tom Stechschulte and Barbara Caruso, Beyond the White House tells of Carter's travels to distant, often war-torn lands from Haiti to Ethiopia on missions of peacekeeping, as well as his efforts to combat disease. Though told in Carter's plain-spoken, folksy manner, Beyond the White House not only illuminates his world-spanning efforts to do good, but also challenges the listener to think and act in ways that promote responsible worldwide social ethics. Highly recommended. 7 CDs, 7 3/4 hours.



2. Beyond the White House is a book written by former U.S. President Jimmy Carter and it covers his political, social, and humanitarian activities since he left the White House early in 1981. Carter has achieved much in his days since leaving Washington D.C. and he seems anxious to share his accomplishments with the reader. Through his Carter Center, the former president, his wife Rosalynn, and their team of associates at the center have labored long hours, traveled around the world, and met with dozens of foreign leaders to work out agreements, wipe out disease, and improve political freedom.
   
   Most people already know about Jimmy Carter's humanitarian works and his efforts to improve the world around him. But some may not be aware of the actual events that have transpired while working toward these goals. Carter explains some of them in detail, and in some instances, he takes the details a bit too far. This is especially true in the book's opening chapters when Carter is discussing his meetings with government leaders of different countries. When I started to read this part of the book, I was expecting something written in a manner similar to a personal memoir. Instead, these opening chapters read like a play- by- play excerpt from a diary. I was expecting a quick overview of the meetings and what was achieved, but Carter felt the need to give the rundown on what happened each day and at different times throughout the day. A quick summary would have been sufficient.
   
   In the second half of the book, however, Carter settles down and starts to talk about some of his important humanitarian achievements. I particularly liked the chapter on fighting disease. I was fully aware of Carter's work with Habitat for Humanity and I knew that he and his wife Rosalynn Carter were active in working toward a disease- free world. But I did not know exactly what diseases were high on their list and what level of success they had achieved. This chapter explains it all, and it includes some graphic photographs of individuals inflicted with certain preventable diseases. Carter explains in this chapter how he and his associates at the Carter Center have worked with the native people of different African nations and have helped them eliminate many diseases simply by encouraging cleanliness and by advocating filtering water before drinking.
   
   The chapter titled "Building Hope" is another good chapter because it includes some of Carter's work on human rights. I would have preferred that this chapter be a little longer, but it still gets the point across. Carter is very concerned about political freedom and he has worked long and hard to spread democracy and basic human rights around the world. I also liked that he included a section on his work in his home state of Georgia; specifically, in the city of Atlanta, to improve living conditions among the city's poor.
   
   Beyond the White House isn't a political book in the usual sense. Carter voices a few concerns about the human rights violations that have taken place under George W. Bush's watch and he points out the positive working relationship he has enjoyed with Gerald Ford, George H.W. Bush, and others. But other than that, he steers clear of political criticisms and differences in this book. He wanted this to be a book about the accomplishments of the Carter Center and he wanted to inspire everyone to work toward change for the betterment of humans around the world. For the most part, this book generally succeeds in these endeavors.
   
   Overall, Beyond the White House is a good book about Jimmy Carter's work as an ex- president and it details the many accomplishments of the Carter Center in its efforts to spread democracy, eliminate disease, and encouraging improvements in human rights. The first part of the book is a little more detailed than it needed to be, and some of the other chapters could use a little more length. But the book is still good overall and it presents a nice summary of what a person can achieve to improve the world around them. Carter had his share of difficulties as president, but his days since leaving the White House have been filled with achievement, and his life is a good example of the good that people can do in the later stages of their lives.



3. What this man has done post presidency is simply amazing. Pres. Carter writes in a simple unassumming style while telling these incredible stories of things he has been involved in since he left office, like eradicating terrible diseases and monitoring elections. A really interesting read..



4. Jimmy Carter's effectiveness as president will be long debated, as will the presidencies of most of the people who have held that office but despite some criticism from the extreme right his post presidential career has won the hearts of most Americans. From the fact that he went back home to his modest Georgia house to the work of the Carter Center to the fact that anyone can go and meet him on most Sundays as he teaches Sunday School at his home church, Jimmy Carter has become the very image of how many people think former presidents should spend their post presidential career.
   
   This book deals almost exclusively with one aspect of Carter's life after the White House and that is the work of the Carter Center. There are numerous very poignant moments described in this book as the former president and first lady travel to many of the most desolate areas of the world seeking to help improve the lives of the people who live there. There is also humor to be found such as the predicament that the first board of directors of the Carter Center found themselves in while trying to figure out how to phrase the by-laws to deal with the governance of the Center after the death of the Carter's. For the most part though this is the very moving story of how the Carter Center has improved the lives of millions of people.
   
   One of the basic thrusts of the book is that because he is an ex-president Jimmy Carter can gain the corporation of third world governments that otherwise would probably not allow these foreigners to work so openly in their countries. There are also diplomatic missions that the Center undertakes and they are well known as election monitors but it is their work fighting and in some cases eliminating disease that is the most impressive and that is the centerpiece of this book. The work of the Center with agriculture is barely mentioned but their success there would likely fill another book all on its own. Also notable is Carter's willingness to give credit for these achievements to others and not to even take all of the credit that is due to he and his wife.
   
   The biggest problem with this book is that a lot of the information found here can be found in President Carter's previous books and so I found that a good bit of the material here seemed pretty repetitive. There is a lot of information that I haven't run across before but in places I did feel like I was rereading a book that I had read before. In all fairness though I can't help but feel that this book was intended to raise public awareness of the Carter Center and its work and to therefore help with fundraising especially in a future that at some point will not include the fundraising powers of a former president. President Carter has become a very skilled author and as usual the writing was excellent and I thoroughly enjoyed the book, even the repetitive parts.



5. To do good works despite the stigma of the U. S. Government is a wish many of us share, and this book shows it can be done. Jimmy Carter is almost embarrassingly present on every page of this book, in the most oppressed, downtrodden and deprived corners of the world. It is not ego, but the ability to use the stature as a former president, that puts Jimmy Carter on these pages. As the author, he credits hundreds of others for their contributions to world peace, health, and improvement. Reluctantly he includes himself, and joyfully he adds Rosalynn, as the catalyst to uplifting change in the realms of politics, health, oppression, and human-caused tragedy around the world.
   In an encyclopedia or almanac format, short essays understate the enormous changes brought about by the ability to move important people to action on behalf of some of the most powerless. Beginning with election monitoring, and with a major portion on eliminating debilitating "forgotten diseases" that infect millions, he concludes with a vision for continuing this kind of work for the next 25 years.
   It becomes obvious that this book is not about Jimmy Carter, or the Carter Center, but about what change is possible. It is a challenge to the best in all of us to follow the example of the plain-spoken nuclear physicist from Plains to do what we can to improve the world. Don't give up; despite massive obstacles from powerful people, bringing the best of each human forward can still bring us all to a better world.
   You can read this as a biography, or as a promotion of the Carter Center, but at the end the possibility of positive change is the torch carried forward by this book.

5 comments about Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy.

1. The purpose of this book to dispel the myth that George W. Bush is a conservative.
   Bruce Bartlett starts out by explaining that many conservative had reservations about this Bush after being disappointed by his father's presidency.
   
   He comments on the war in Iraq on page 10. "Most traditional conservatives had deep misgivings about the war, which was driven mainly by neoconservatives, a conservative offshoot established by former liberals."
   
   Allen Lichtman is quoted on Bush's presidency. "Political revolution in the United States, creating a form of conservative big government that promotes not the general interests of ordinary Americans, but the special intersts of big corporations."
   
   George H. W Bush lost his bid for reelection partly because of the economy. That highlighted his disinterest in economic policy. He focused on foreign policy and neglected domestic policy.
   John Dilulio revealed that there has been a lack of "serious policy fiber" regarding economics in G.W's administration. The economic advisers in the current administration have no clear direcion and very little input in decisions.
   The economic crises that we have today are caused in large part by George W. Bush's ignorance and lack of interest on economic policy or the process of studying options.
   
   There are insider quotes from Richard Clarke and Ron Suskind about the attitude in the Bush White House that come off as arrogant and detached from reality.
   
   I think that Mr. Bartlett has accurately diagnosed the myriad of leadership flaws in the current president and I agree that he is not a conservative by any means, particularly on the economy.
   
   There were some interesting tidbits such as-
   *That Paul Krugman was an adviser to Enron.
   *Columnist Jim Pinkerton noted that Karl Rove got his start in politics during Nixon's 1972 campaign.
   *The author finds multiple similarites between Bush 2 and Nixon on domestic policy and pandering for votes. Bush is definitely a big government-big spender!
   
   Some points that I don't agree with at all are that trade protection is a bad thing for one.
   Protectionism is a great idea if you work in a factory or a textile mill where jobs were or could be outsourced!
   Another is that I don't agree that the E.P.A. and O.S.H.A. are less important that the cost to business associated with their regulations.
   
   Bruce Bartlett does make a compelling case for George W. Bush being an impostor. Bartlett takes a look from a historical standpoint at Bush's economic disaster compared to policies of former presidents. The economic information is rigorous reading but the book overall is worth a read.



2. Unhappy is an understatement. He's steamed. As if there weren't enough Bush 43 haters already! Here's Bruce Bartlett, major heavyweight economist, a guy with a resume so solid you could blast it with phasers and they'd just bounce off, speaking out in no uncertain terms.
   
   The only fault I had with this book is that the author sees things narrowly. When you're holding a hammer, everything looks like a nail. When you're an economist, everything looks like money. Not totally, but there's a perceptible bias.
   
   Considering it only as a critique of how our 43rd president has done on the economy, I've no complaint.



3. Sure, it's easy for those on the left to bash Bush. But when other *conservatives* start taking exception to his policies...
   
   Author Bruce Bartlett considers himself a "Reagan Conservative", favoring small government, free markets, free trade. Bush, on the other hand, favors big government solutions such as Medicare drug program, agricultural subsidies, and tariffs on imported steel. Bush's tax cuts, unlike Reagan's, were not well thought out at all. In short, Bush and the Republican Congress has turned into a money-spending machine similar to the Democratic Congresses of years before....without real revenue to back it up.
   
   Bush, unlike the more affable Reagan, is characterized as a secretive, Nixonian type. He knows what he wants to do, he knows what he wants to hear, and woe betide anyone who tries to present bad news of information to the contrary.
   
   The author, while expressing concerns about the Iraq war, mostly sticks to economic issues. He definitely takes the philosophy that less government regulation is better, spending several pages on Sarbanes-Oxley (corporate governance regulations). He admits that Bill Clinton was better at managing the US budget, while Bush was more like Nixon in the way he spent money.
   
   There will be a tax increase, one way or another, after all is said and done. Bartlett favors a Value Added Tax (VAT), such as used in Canada and Europe.
   
   The book is informative and easy to read, even if you do not have an degree in economics. Bartlett (according to the back cover) lost his job in the Treasury department over the ideas in this book, so that alone should indicate that there is more than "smoke" there....



4. Well written entertaining hard hitting book on the various failures of the Bush presidency.
   
   This book is packed with facts and logic supporting the author's thesis that George W. Bush is not a conservative president and has done a bad job from a conservative perspective. Rather GWB has been a highly partisan Republican president in the genre of Richard Nixon in that he has pushed liberal policies like expansion of medicare benefits, pouring billions into educations, committing the troops to nation-building of a democracy (which no doubt will end up like Vietnam) in a place where US troops don't belong.
   
   If you are a die-hard Bush fan or a liberal Bush-hater don't bother buying this book as it probably won't provide any enjoyment. But if you are an intelligent open-minded individual who appreciates a frank discussion of policy from the conservative viewpoint you should not be disappointed.



5. This book by a Reagan insider reveals in stark detail Bush's hipocracy in using the conservative title. Bartlett shows him as an grandiose opportunist who believes he is guided by God, and making all the errors of judgement that stem from such absurd overconfidence.

5 comments about President Kennedy: Profile of Power.

1. This is not a 5-star book. The author must have a lot of friends who will write a review for him. Not only is the book lacking in substance, but I just read an opinion of this author about Gov. Sarah Palin where he claims she is an idiot. He doesn't mention that the other candidate for VP, Joe Biden, told Katie Couric that FDR was president during the 1929 stock market crash (sorry folks, FDR came much later) or that Biden said FDR appeared on television in 1929 (sorry folks, TV came much later). No, author Richard Reeves attacked Sarah Palin as being historically challenged when Biden is the more historically challenged. You want to trust an author like that to write a book of substance about John F. Kennedy? Don't waste your money.



2. As the leading civilian authority on the U.S. Secret Service (and President Kennedy's interaction with the agency), I was much interested in this book by Richard Reeves. I am a big fan of Mr. Reeves---in addition to a great book on Richard Nixon, he is a great writer and speaker. You can't go wrong in purchasing this fine book. vince palamara



3. Jackie Kennedy is said to have given copies of this book to her children with the advice, "If you want to know your father, he is in this book." Reeves was said to be surprised at her endorsement and commented. "I wasn't terribly flattering to Jackie in the book."
   Well worth the read.



4. After reading this book, I feel that I come out understanding the Kennedy presidency in better terms. While Sorenson and Schlesinger wrote impeccable accounts on the admininstration, they are somewhat distorted, and make Kennedy out to be a hero. This well-written and higly researched account, I feel to be the definintive account of the administration. It shows the flaws of President Kennedy, and the true personality of the man in the White House, his battle with Addison's disease. Kennedy was a very inexperienced leader at the beginning of his presidency, and I don't feel that it really dawned on him until the Bay of Pigs and the Cuban Missile Crisis.
   
   This detailed account covers his meetings with Premier Krushchev, how he dealt with South Vietnam, and the apparent sickness that came upon him after learning of the death of Ngo Din Diem. You also see that Kennedy was very much a womanizer, almost to the point of obsession it seems. This book deserves much attention, and for anybody who has never read about President Kennedy, an excellent start.



5. This book is a well-written chronological account of Kennedy's presidency. Minimized is the personal gossip and inuendo while highlighted is the decision-making style of JFK and his entourage as events unfold. You get a sense of what it's like being thrust into the vortex of events for which no president is totally prepared. The writer attempts to reveal President Kennedy as both more and less than the Camelot charisma would have you believe. Thoroughly enjoyable and informative must-read addition.