5 comments about Jefferson Davis, American.

1. Before opening up Jefferson Davis, American I knew nothing about the actual man apart from his one-dimensional depiction in history. I only knew the leader of the Confederacy as a side figure who participated vicariously in the most meaningful events of his century. As for his individuality, I assumed he was a cold, vain, and dispassionate person but my assumptions were totally incorrect and many myths are dispelled here. The reader discovers that Davis was anything but a pro-secessionist fanatic. He was a conservative who was elected to the post of president due to his sincerity and lack of radicalism. Due to the heinous nature of slavery, we tend to now dismiss everything about the Confederacy as being evil but Davis and his allies raised important questions about the state's relationship to its people. William Cooper's erudite examination of this misunderstood man will impress you and provide you with a fuller picture of the most tragic era in American history.



2. What I knew of Jeff Davis before reading Cooper was his history as a war president and relationships with Lee, Bragg, Johnston, Beauregard, Hood and the rest. When I set out to find a biography of Davis I ended up selecting Cooper's Jefferson Davis, American because he's a professor at my alma mater, LSU. Turns out I made the right choice, albeit for a dumb reason. Cooper's treatment of Davis is fair and thorough. In addition to the war of 1861-1865, he gives outstanding coverage of his early life, education, West Point and service in the Mexican War, political career and excellent analysis of Davis' beliefs on the slavery, states rights and secession issues. His postwar years, confinement at Fort Monroe, travel abroad and time at Beauvoir were interesting as well.
   
   I found Davis' wife, Varina to be an intriguing personality and a woman somewhat out of her time. Her memoir would make some interesting reading I'm sure. As another reviewer has pointed out, it's a shame that Cooper didn't give more on Varina after Davis' death.



3. Like many of the reviewers, I think this is very good. I came to this biography because I wanted to understand The Civil War better from the perspective of the South. This book covers that well in that it does provide a good overview of how Davis viewed equality as being about equality and balance between the states in the union and not equality between people. For Davis, the Constitution was primarily about the interactions between states.
   
   On the reviews that say that the book glosses over Davis's owning of slaves, I saw these sections differently. It appears that Cooper did not have any evidence that Davis had abused his slaves in the cruel sense. So, he can't write that. However, just the simple description of how many slaves Davis owned, how old they were (adult, old, and children), and how Davis's slave "assets" grew from the birth of children was disgusting to me. There did not need to be cruelty for the idea that a child born into slavery could not decide on their own future. While it is hard for me to fathom how Davis could speak of liberty while owning slaves, Cooper did a good job of framing how Davis probably thought about slavery. In the end, the overview made me more thankful to have not lived in those times, just as living in even more ancient times would have been even worse.
   
   The other sections that I found interesting were the descriptions of Davis' participation in the Mexican War. Having recently read a biography of James Polk and now this, I think I will have to look for a good history of the Mexican War.
   
   Lastly, I agree with the reviewer that the book needed an epilogue that spoke to Varina Davis's last years. Throughout the book, she is a large part of the story and to stop the book with Jefferson's death just didn't work.



4. It is rare that a biographer can capture both the essence of his/her subject and the historical context of that particular subject's time. Cooper not only does so, he does so brilliantly, like no other biographer of Davis has done to date. Cooper focuses less on Davis's role as leader of a doomed Confederate Nation and more on his accomplishments as a Mississippi politician. That is not to say that Cooper ignores Davis's role in the Confederate war effort and national politics. He writes extenisvely on the friction between Davis and two of his leading Generals, explaining how Davis went from being a luke-warm secessionist to the most ardent Confederate Nationalist in the South. Cooper also focuses on Davis's role in the Mexican War and his youth at West Point, his managing of slaves, his friction with his wife, and his constant battles with weak health. Cooper also focuses rather extensively on Davis's time after the war and his travels abroad. In this excellent biography, Cooper captures Davis the man, not Davis the symbol of a lost cause, setteling ultimately on Davis as a patriot and American.



5. Alone among historical events from which the participants are all dead, our Civil War continues to ignite passions. Many treat the issues as current, and see the personages as a still-living presence. Trust me; I live in a suburb of Richmond, and see it all the time. Up front, let me say that I respect President Davis; I visit his house and grave, and contribute to the maintenance of both.
   
   Was Davis the right man for the job? He was probably the best man available. Bob Toombs? He would have been perfect if he could have been depended on to be sober. Breckinridge? Sure, but he was Vice President of the United States when the Confederacy was formed, and he also knew which end the bottle poured out of. Louis Wigfall? Brilliant, loyal, but an alcoholic hot-head. Alex Stephens? Please. A brilliant man; a good and decent man, but not a true leader.
   
   This is an absolutely outstanding biography of a very difficult man to study. Sure, it's a long book, but Davis' life was long, and complicated. Reading it, one doesn't notice the length; Cooper is such a superb writer that this is a "page turner". Davis gets full cradle to grave coverage. The tough issues are in no wise avoided. His early education, West Point training, and U.S. Army career are all well documented. The stories of Davis' all too brief marriage to Sarah Knox Taylor, and the subsequent seven years of isolation are particularly poignant. Marriage to Varina gave him a second start, and he made the most of it. To my mind, Varina Davis is the absolute definition of "First Lady".
   
   Jeff Davis was a man of his time and place. Before anyone would criticize him, it is well to reflect on the danger of applying the standards of our day to a man from another; Thomas Jefferson, Ty Cobb, even FDR, all came from a different age; so did Jeff. In his day, the right [NOT wisdom] of secession was assumed; the White man's right to own, and obligation to care for, the Black were instilled from birth. On the record, Davis was probably as humane a slave owner as existed anywhere. Only once did he ever break up a family, and that was after much begging by the slave. Davis DID NOT want secession; he followed reluctantly.
   
   The tragedy of Jefferson Davis is that he was called to lead a country founded on State's Rights, which was then done-in by State's Rights. Vain, obstinate, and difficult, he was loyal and devoted. His mistakes are not glossed over. His loyalty to a fool like Lucius Northrop, and his tragic inability to get the most out of Joe Johnston and Beauregard are both part and parcel of the man. One of Jeff's flaws was the inability to work with people he didn't like, which FDR, for example, did quite well. One of his very worst errors was in thinking that Braxton Bragg was a field commander; placed behind a desk in Richmond, Bragg could have done for Davis what Marshall did for Roosevelt. By the time Bragg got his desk, it was too late. Davis could also be unwaveringly supportive of great men, like Robert E. Lee, and Judah Benjamin. Was his overall strategic vision the correct one? Who knows? A case can certainly be made either way. Jeff tried his best; I doubt anyone could have done better. Though some may call him obstinate, his strength and refusal to quit kept the country going long after others would have given up.
   
   If I have to criticize something about a great book, it's this: Jeff had a lot of health problems [which may well have affected his job performance], and they are documented as if writing for physicians. No problem here, but...while Plasmodium falciparum and herpetic keratoiritis may be perfectly understandable to me, others may need explanation. You may know a lot about the Civil War, but your knowledge is incomplete unless you know something about the political leaders behind the Generals. Reading this book will be time well spent.

No comments about Mandela : Struggle and Triumph.

5 comments about The Compleated Autobiography by Benjamin Franklin (1757-1790).

1. This is an inspiring book, sure to make you think about how awesome it was that our nation was founded and hugely successful in such a short time, against all odds. Drawn from Franklin's writings and compiled by one of his descendants, it covers a wide variety of topics, more than just politics, in an informative as well as entertaining way. There can be no doubt that Benjamin Franklin was one of the greatest, wisest and best-loved men of his day, not just in America, but in France and England as well. I highly recommend this very readable and thought-provoking book.



2. I had never read Volume 1 of Benjamin Franklin's autobiography, so I didn't know what to expect when I bought Volume 2, which was compiled from Dr. Franklin's diaries by one of his descendants, Dr. Mark Skousen. I really thought that because 200 years had gone by, it would be rather dry with way too many historical details and that I would never finish it. A good book to help me fall asleep at night. But I was wrong. I simply loved it.
   
   Dr. Franklin was quite a character and this book shows in his own words what he thought of his fellow 'founding fathers,' (especially his opinion of John Adams!!) how he managed to keep some of his English friends in the midst of the Revolutionary War, and the woman who got away (quite possibly the only one).
   
   This is not a book just for a history class. It is most, most entertaining and I finished it in record time. I wish Ben had lived to 100 instead of just 84.
   
   Highly recommended if you like history and even if you don't.
   
   Heidi Walter
   [...]



3. This is a review of the audio version of this work.
   
   I found this to be a great disappointment, bordering on annoying. The author was attempting to complete Franklin's autobiography which doesn't cover the second half of his life. I found two very difficult problems with the work.
   
   First, the opening of the audio book presents the author's background including why he wanted to do this. This introduction was distractingly self-serving and provided quite a bit more about the author than any reader would probably expect. He is a descendant of Franklin, which may spurn his motivation....but failed to make the experience any more enlightening.
   
   Second, the book is written "using Franklin's own words"...or so says the notes from the publisher. What it does is try to use the language of Franklin's day including quickly worn out expressions and lines. I tired very quickly of the authors attempt to turn every phrase like a Poor Richard quip. What he may have gained in accuracy, made the audio experience painful.
   
   I do not recommend the audio edition for those two reasons, nor would I recommend the book. One would be better served with Isaacson's (BF: An American Life) book for a look at the second half of Franklin's life....it's simply written better and it offers more insight.
   
   The idea of getting inside Franklin's head and finishing the autobiography is compelling....but this attempt failed in it's lofty goal.
   
   --Cudo



4. Let's just say I am a Franklin buff. If you really like Franklin or history this is a worth while read. If you want to learn more about Franklin you should start with the Autobiography and then move to one of the many Bios, the most recent of which is Walter Isaacson's "Benjamin Franklin." If you get through those, you may be well ready for this read. To be honest, in my opinion, the author stands in the way of this work a little but it is not bad.



5. Book received timely and in excellent condition. Am still in the process of reading it.

No comments about Presidential Cookies: The Lure and the Lore: Cookie Recipes of the Presidents of the United States.

5 comments about How Ronald Reagan Changed My Life.

1. This is a fun book. Robinson's snapshot of Reagan brings back a lot of the things that many of us, including Democrats, admired about Reagan. Reagan's personality which was charming and opptumistic was such a refreshing change from Carter, Ford, Nixon and Johnson. Here was a President who knew what he thought, and seemed completely genuine when he smiled at his detractors.
   
   Robinson says up front that this book is not a memoir, but an analysis of the many things he learned from Reagan. The book is a memoir however, and you can't help but notice who makes it in the book and who does not.
   
   Robininson's lists four of the "most important speaches of the Reagan presidency," Why four? Maybe because these are the four that he and his friends wrote! Amazing. Robinson manages to leave out Peggy Noonan's contribution to the Reagan speechwriting team entirely. In fact her name does not even appear in the book. Think the Challenger speach and the Normandy speach might have been worth mentioning in lessons learned from Reagan? Apparently Robinson didn't learn a thing from them. Given the fact that Robinson was fresh out of college when he went to work for Reagan, its more than a little strange that more experienced writers were left out of the book.
   
   This book is fun and very readable but if you don't know a thing about Reagan's speeches, don't start with this book.



2. Before Christmas of the year Peter Robinson's book on Reagan was published, I bought seven copies to give as gifts to my two sons, as well as to each male member of my extended family. The day before Christmas, while I was at our local bookstore hurriedly acquiring yet another copy for someone I had forgotten, a man beside me was ordering a dozen of Robinson's books to give for Christmas presents. Now, years later, I am back again, buying yet another book for a college-bound student.
   Oh, that all our children could have not only Reagan as a role model for living all of life, but also Peter Robinson, whose life, work, and character up to the present time has become even more outstanding over these last few years since he decided to use Reagan as a role model. What a positive impact people like these could have on our heavily sensate, self-absorbed culture.



3. Wonderfully written book with great insight into one of the greatest men of all time. Insightful look in to the inner workings of the presidency.



4. Inspirational words from the Reagan White House speechwriter who wrote the "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall" speech, which was the ammo by which Ronald Reagan defeated Communism without a shot.
   In addition to being inspiring, this book paints a good picture of what it's like if your first real job out of college is putting words in the mouth of the leader of the free world.



5. Superior insight into the mind of Reagan and the lessons he is still teaching all of us.

1 comments about The Inspired Wisdom of Abraham Lincoln: How Faith Shaped an American President -- and Changed the Course of a Nation.

1. I only wish the politicians of today would follow the lead of a man as simple and great as Abraham Lincoln.

5 comments about Monica's Story.

1. I initially purchased this book because I have been following Bill Clinton's presidency and career for many years. I expected to discover new things about him and to maybe get an insight about this affair. I think Monica would have done a better job writing this book in her own voice and explaining the emotions, thoughts and reason which led her to this affair. As for Clinton, he came out of this thing better than I thought. I wasn't at all surprised by the conversations and relationship experiences that I read. The only thing I was amazed at was how he managed to keep functioning in the midst of this stormy relationship and the all afterward in which he tried to help her find a job. I think in the end I felt sorry for both of them for not thinking twice before they jumped into a whirlwind affair that would inflict so many wounds on both of them, especially her.



2. good book it kept my attention, was looking for more detail but all in all it was a good book...



3. Monica Samille Lewinsky appears to be either incredibly naive or incredibly childish. This book is not a page turner. If you are interested in her camps' POV... then you may like this book. The author says her "disorderly routine and her neurotic behavior over weight perfectly explain why she never cleaned the notorious blue Gap dress that was stained with the President's semen" (page 11).
   
   She is characterized as very naive. She documented every little detail as if it was major, which appears that she had a motive for the future use of this information. It gave me thoughts that she was contemplating possible blackmail, book deals, and/or movie deals.
   
   Yet again... she was either incredibly smart, naive, or silly.



4. This book was quite dumb, and all that it does is emphasize how dumb people can be. If you're a Republican right-winger who's more interested in a president's, a man's, sexcapades than what he does with the economy, then read on by all means. This mindless book was made for you.



5. Any woman in her early twenties, who has ever fallen in love with a man who is married and forbidden by conventional ethical and professional standards, will find empathy in this book.

   Whatever side of truth or political scenario this book attempts to portray, I primarily read it as a romance and enjoyed it more than ever. The book's appeal lies in the dynamics of the affair between the young intern and the president, rather than any political truth-finding. Maybe, there are too many 'truths' out there, and who are we to judge which one is true. This is Monica's version, so why quibble about absolute realities?

   The book certainly does a good job of revealing her a human figure rather than a man-hunting slut responsible for the impreachment of Clinton.

   Why marvel Marie Antoinette and Josephine, and not Monica? I admire Monica Lewinsky as a person who enjoys poetry, loves life, watches her weight, experiments with men, and most of all braves what the world thinks of her. I really think people ought to stop thinking of her as a sex symbol.

   Tragic as the love story's end is, Monica RULZ!!!

5 comments about Reagan's War: The Epic Story of His Forty-Year Struggle and Final Triumph Over Communism.

1. Consider this: LBJ sought to fight Vietnam in a calibrated way. In the words of LBJ's national security advisor, McGeorge Bundy: "We should strike to hurt but not to destroy...For the purpose of changing North Vietnamese decision on intervention in the South."
   
   Nixon: "The only time in the history of the world that we have had any extended period of peace is when there has been a balance of power." I think it will be a safer world and better world if we have a stronger, healthy, US, Europe, Soviet Union, China, Japan, each balancing the other, not playing one against the other, an even balance." A stronger Soviet Union is GOOD!
   
   Carter diary: It's important that he [Brezhnev] understand the commitment I have to human rights first of all and that it is not an antagonistic attitude of mine toward the Soviet Union."
   
   Compare the above with Reagan's view, in Reagan's own words; better yet, since many detractors of Reagan give no weight to either Reagan's deeds or words, let's utilize the words of some who could not be classified as Reagan partisans, and thus not beyond the reproach of the bias charge:
   
   "The 1970s were the years of further growth of power and influence of the socialist commonwealth." "We were able to achieve the military-strategic parity with the West. This gave us an opportunity to deal with them on an equal basis. Our dynamic policy of détente led to substantial positive shifts in international relations.' That's then KGB Chairman Andropov when he spoke before a secret session of the Warsaw Pact Consultative Committee in Czechoslovakia.
   
   Said KGB Deputy Chairman Georgy Tsinev to his operatives: "It would not be a mistake to say that the Reagan Administration practically began an economic war against us."
   
   According to a USSR Central Committee report (from July 31, 1986), Reagan's policy was "to exhaust the USSR and its allies...wearing it down in conflicts in different regions of the world."
   
   A Polish Ministry of Internal Affairs report has come to light, as well, stating that Reagan's "principal goal is the destruction of the socialist system in all its forms."
   
   It was Reagan who pushed for the Strategic Defense Initiative (beginning in 1983); it was Reagan (against the advice of his cabinet) who was determined to strangle the Polish economy after the declaration of martial law there, to take, in Reagan's own words, perhaps "the last chance of a lifetime to go against this damned force." (Trade between the West and Poland was 7.5 billion dollars in 1980; by 1986 it dropped to 1 billion. Poland was borrowing 8 billion annually before 1980; by 1985 this was cut to $300,000 annually.)
   
   National Security Directive 75 (NSC 75) was adopted in 1982, "To promote, within the narrow limits available to us, the process of change in the Soviet Union toward a more pluralistic political and economic system in which the power of the privileged elite is gradually reduced. The U.S. recognizes that Soviet aggressiveness has deep roots in the internal system, and that relations with the USSR should therefore take into account whether or not they help to strengthen the system and its capacity to engage in aggression."
   
   Former Soviet Prime Minister N. Ryzhkov acknowledged that the Soviet economy began to slide in 1982.
   
   Reagan's defense buildup continued (March 83: Reagan proposes ballistic missile defenses in his SDI speech; "The military share of Soviet GNP would rise from 22 to 27% during Reagan's first term..."), active resistance to Marxism continued (Oct 23 1983: Reagan removes Marxists in Grenada), and economic pressure continued to be applied to the USSR (Saudi Arabian coordination to lower oil prices---the Soviet Union's life support).
   
   Gorbachev acceded to the Leninist throne not until 1985
   
   Shortly after Reykjavik Gorbachev told his Politburo:
   "They look at us in the West and wait for us to drown."
   
   Reagan from his early days in Hollywood, and later as president of the Screens Actors Guild, stood against communists who sought to gain control of Hollywood unions. (Russian archives prove that such organizers were in the pay of Stalin.) He spoke out against the USSR and communism continuously thereafter up until and while in the oval office.
   
   George Kennan, the father of the American policy of Soviet containment criticized Reagan for undermining détente. Damn détente, said Reagan in effect. "For more than decade the US had been on the retreat in the developing world. Allies had collapsed in Asia, the Middle East, and Latin America, and the Vietnam syndrome seemed to have paralyzed presidents into inaction. At the same time Moscow had advanced, picking up new allies around the world;" all under the guise of `détente.'
   
   Said Reagan's defense secretary Caspar Weinberger: "If the movement from the Cold War to détente is progress we cannot afford much more progress." Lenin once said that capitalists would sell the rope from which they ultimately hang; the idea that cooperation would, to say the least, disproportionately aid the Soviets. Fortunately, Ronald Reagan, when presented with the choice, took the path less traveled and that has made all the difference. (08Oct) Cheers



2. Reagan's War is an EXCELLENT non-fiction book. The background info is filled with fascinating facts - many of which I did not know. It arrived faster than anticipated.



3. This is typical Reaganaut triumphalism, but at least it's one of the better attempts. Its central thesis, that Reagan had an agenda to "tear down that wall," is essentially correct. But missing here is a sense of what "Communism" meant in Ronald Reagan's world: not just the USSR or Marxism-Leninism, but anything to the left of the white good-old-boy cocktail and country-club crowd, from unions to feminism to affirmative action, with real Communism as the handy lever to pry at them all. "Constructive engagement" with South Africa and Nicaragua's Somoza as "friends of the Free World" says much about the limitations of his agenda, and that of his worshippers.
   
   Also in question is the author's thesis that Reagan the warrior slew the Red dragon with his own lone sword. Communism did "work," in its sphere - despite the author's sweeping statement to the contrary - but globalization increasingly left its model in the dust. No doubt Reagan's specific policies - economic embargoes and guerrilla proxy wars - helped, but could not have without the larger systemic isolation of the USSR already underway throughout the global market.
   
   There are interesting tidbits of info culled from Soviet files. But the contention that the USSR funded the Peace Movement is overhyped as was Reagan's original accusation, while the greater dependency of Solidarity, Charter 77 and other East European dissidents on Reagan's largesse is of course seen as totally praiseworthy. The betrayal of Solidarity's working class roots after 1989, in favor of free-market neoliberalism, doubtless comes from the NED funding of the Reagan years.
   
   All in all, a good attempt at lauding Reagan as the victorious cold warrior, but in the end he still comes across as a blinkered ideologue in perfect counterpoint to nemeses like Fidel Castro or Ayatollah Khomeini.



4. Well documented and supported. A great aide for any serious student or lover of history who wants to know not just what but why. Made me realize that Americans were fortunate to have this man at that time much as they could never have what they have without George Washington. Two great patriots 200 years apart.



5. I owned this book for 2 years before finally deciding to read it. Why? Because I thought it would be a bit boring. Boy was I wrong.
   
   Using our adversaries' own words through recently-released Soviet archives, etc., Schweizer's work is so thorough that the book reads almost like a spy novel. If you're a red-blooded American you'll smile and cheer as you read the account of one of America's great patriots and his life-long stand against the tyranny of communism.
   
   From Hollywood to Moscow, President Reagan's stand for freedom is inspiring. Highly entertaining and historically educational, I recommend this book to all.

5 comments about Thomas Jefferson: (The American Presidents Series).

1. In his biography of Thomas Jefferson, titled "American Sphinx," Joseph Ellis tellingly says at one point (Page xvii): "As I have found him, there really is a core of convictions and apprehensions at his center. Although he was endlessly elusive and extraordinarily adroit at covering his tracks, there were bedrock Jeffersonian values that determined the shape of the political vision he projected so successfully onto his world. . . ."
   
   Joyce Appleby, author of this brief volume in The American Presidents series, attempts to capture that elusiveness. As noted many times, this series provides brief, readable, and often (but not always) insightful analyses--but at the cost of depth. For many, that tradeoff is well worth it, and I would rather someone read a brief biography and think a bit about the subject rather than not read anything at all about the subjects. Appleby begins by noting that Jefferson (Page 1) ". . .instilled the nation with his liberal convictions," the two most important, in the author's eyes, being participatory politics and limited government. These were clearly central aspects of Jefferson's political philosophy. However, his enmity toward a hierarchical, ordered society dominated by an elite is undermined by his ambivalent views on, for example, slavery. Jefferson, as a person, is someone who often manifest conflicting elements to his thinking.
   
   This book, to its credit, gives credit to Jefferson for his accomplishments, whether as ambassador to France, his role in authoring the Declaration of Independence, his advocacy for the political equality of white males--including those who were not persons of means. The work also juxtaposes those with his ambivalence about slavery (at one point, he fears that the country will have to suffer greatly for the "peculiar institution" and, at another point, he cannot conceive blacks and whites living together in amity and equality) and about gender (he could not conceive women as political equals, although he could treat individual women, such as daughters and Abigail Adams, with considerable respect). The book also straightforwardly addresses the issue of his relationship with one of his slaves, Sally Hemings. It also discusses his somewhat problematic behavior while serving in Washington's Cabinet, as he fought with Alexander Hamilton and authorized nasty newspaper attacks on the Administration.
   
   As President, he presided over some great moments--the Louisiana Purchase, the taking seriously of political freedoms, the advocacy of political rights for the less well born, the opening of the West, the exploration of Lewis and Clark, the successful prosecution of the war against the Barbary pirates. On the other side, his cold approach toward native Americans, his failed economic policies directed against the French and British as the United States became a pawn in their struggle for supremacy, his inability to address the slavery issue (although he pushed legislation to end the slave trade at the earliest time possible under the Constitution--introducing yet again his ambivalences).
   
   So, this is a useful short biography laying out this elusive character. Appleby meets, I think, the challenge of presenting this complex person in a slender volume. Worth looking at. . . .



2. In her study for the American Presidents series, historian Joyce Appleby observes (p.132) that "America's most pressing history assignment is coming to terms with Thomas Jefferson." Indeed the variety of reviews on this site, and their varying assessments of Jefferson, themselves bear witness to the difficulties of understanding our third president. Appelby has written a nuanced, brief study of Jefferson's presidency with all its complexities and contradictions. She is more sympathetic to Jefferson than are many other scholars. Yet, she also lets the reader see Jefferson's flaws and inconsistencies. Her book gives the reader new to Jefferson a good starting point for understanding not only Jefferson's presidency but also some lasting issues in American political thought.
   
   Jefferson wished to be remembered as the author of the Declaration of Independence and of the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom and as the Father of the University of Virginia. Appleby of necessity treads lightly on these and many other significant accomplishments to focus on Jefferson's fundamental ideas and on his presidency.
   
   For Appleby, Jefferson was the founder of participatory democracy. While the other Founders, including Washington, Adams, and Hamilton tended towards an elitist concept of government in which the educated and well-born exercised disinterested political control, Jefferson sought a much broader base for political power and activity. Jefferson wanted to break down distinctions based on wealth or background for political participation. In practice, as Appelby points out, Jefferson expanded the scope of political participation to include all white males. The converse is that he continued to exclude African Americans, Native Americans, and women. But he still was far more inclusive than his contemporaries. And Jefferson laid the foundation, in his "self-evident" truth that "All men are created equal" for his successors over many years to see his own shortcomings and to pass beyond them.
   
   On a broader level, Appleby insightfully describes Jefferson as the founder of one of the two main strains of American political thought.Jefferson was an enlightenment thinker who believed that people were essentially good and that they possessed the ability to understand and solve the issues confronting them. This is a key belief of most forms of political liberalism. Jefferson's opponents, exemplified by the Federalists and particularly by John Adams, evidenced a distrust of the human heart and an awareness of the mind's capacity for deception. They were inclined to put checks on the multitudes. Adams, as Jefferson's rival, has become the founding figure of the difficult and elusive part of American thought called conservatism. Jefferson was in his opposition to Washington and Adams and, in spite of himself, the founder of two-party politics in the United States.
   
   Appelby begins her account of Jefferson's presidency with the election of 1800, one of the closest and least understood in our history. Jefferson assumed the presidency with the goal of limiting government and increasing the autonomy of the individual. Appleby describes Jefferson's astounding Louisiana Purchase, which greatly increased presidential power, as intended to promote Jeffersonian goals by opening up land to settlement by small, independent yeoman farmers.Appleby discusses well the important constitutional changes that were wrought during Jefferson's time, some by Jefferson himself -- as in the Louisiana Purchase -- and some by his opponent, Chief Justice John Marshall.
   
   Jefferson's second term was plagued by his former Vice-president, Aaron Burr, who was tried for treason for attempting to lead a secession movement in the West. The nature of Burr's activities have always been obscure, but Jefferson actively sought his conviction. Burr was acquitted after a trial in which Chief Justice Marshall presided.
   
   The closing years of Jefferson's presidency saw a great increase in tension between the United States and both Great Britain and France as the two European powers refused to respect American neutrality on the high seas. Late in his administration, Jefferson secured the enactment of an Embargo which resulted in great domestic divisiveness and near economic ruin. The Embargo would soon lead under President Madison to the War of 1812.
   
   Appleby gives a brief account of Jefferson's life following his presidency, including the important correspondence he held with his former rival and friend, John Adams. Jefferson and Adams effected a reconciliation in the correspondence of their old age even though their philosophical differences remained. The reconciliation of these two Founders suggests that both Adams's conservatism and Jefferson's liberalism have much to contribute, in their insights and tensions, to a vibrant, thriving United States. Appleby's own sympathies in her fine thougtful study are clearly with Jefferson and with the liberal tradition.
   
   Robin Friedman



3. First, let's begin with the premise that the collaberation of, at one time, in one relative place, and with (seemingly) one goal, those who have come to be collectively known as the Founding Fathers was, by any accounts, an extraordinary period in the history of humanity. A Dream Team, if you will.
   
   Second, let's remind ourselves that none of these men were devoid of their flaws. Many, in retrospect, carried their warts and blemishes with a sense of pride, if not prominence.
   
   While it is inevitable, and not inappropriate to find an interest in these founders and their various achievements so timely and exciting centuries after they did what they did, it is also inevitable that the lines of truth and accuracy have faded in the interim, and an honest interpretation of events between 1750 and 1820 requires of the interpretor an open mind, and a lack of preconceived notions.
   
   Ms. Appleby has not satisfied that requirement in her Jefferson interpretation.
   
   Appleby admits in the opening paragraphs to be an admirer, and continues to clarify that point throughout the book. She sets Jefferson apart from the other 'founders,' who are minimized, if not dismissed as having provided less,if any substance to the drive for that ultimate goal. Indeed, Appleby seems to be saying that the goals of the various gentlemen involved were so varied as to be in direct opposition to each other.
   
   Moreover, Appleby outrightly idolizes Jefferson. Her platitudes do not, however, shine any more light on the man, who certainly qualifies as one of the more secretive/introspective of the bunch. Instead, one is left the option of accepting Jefferson as a Moses-like character, or of choosing to look elsewhere for a more in depth assessment of this certainly great man.
   
   Other reviewers have noted her attention to Jefferson's issues with slavery, with women, with indians. These are discussed, but rather than in a way that would try to find a root cause, or to compare them with other frailties in his character, the effort seems to be to offer them as some offset to the bulk of the material, which is close to hero worship.
   
   There is enough information about Jefferson, even considering the depths of his persona, to identify some (but certainly not all) of the demons that tormented the man. And also enough information to know that Jefferson was not immune to crossing the lines of decorum that separate the common man from the political climber. But you wont find that discussion here.
   
   In the end, we have yet another portrait of this man, who deserves his place in the pantheon, but ther is no flesh, no blood, no heart. Just canvas.



4. Joyce Appleby's concise "Thomas Jefferson" is a well-written book mainly about Thomas Jefferson's presidency. Appleby understands Jefferson's place in history and gets the story right. I also recommend R.B. Bernstein's concise "Thomas Jefferson," which covers Jefferson's entire life better. But for a book on the presidency of Thomas Jefferson, Appleby's book is a fine choice.



5. Many may believe that political equality has existed in the United States since the very founding. Even ignoring the disenfranchisement of women and the subjugation of twenty percent of the population to slavery, that is a questionable belief. Many elites in the colonies, including many directly connected with the revolution, wanted to roll back any unleashed democratic impulses. The landed gentry, lawyers, the educated, merchants and creditors, and the like assumed that their superiority entitled them to control society's institutions including government. In their view, it was in the best interests of all if the unlearned population deferred to the better element of society. That was Thomas Jefferson's assessment of the political culture in the early years of the US.
   
   According to the author, one of Jefferson's main achievements was countering this presumption of elite control of society and politics. Though an aristocrat and intellectual, Jefferson developed a respect for the political rights and participation of the average citizen. Jefferson along with democratic political clubs infused with admiration for the French Revolution and a vigorous oppositional press formed an unofficial political party, the Republicans, to oppose the entrenched elites, known as the Federalists. The passage of the Sedition Act under Adams confirmed the Federalist fears and disdain for true political freedom.
   
   Jefferson dispensed with all symbols of aristocratic pretension when assuming the Presidency. Under Washington and Adams, the protocols of the European courts were rigorously followed. Jefferson understood that the style of his Presidency made a statement about whom or what was truly important.
   
   Jefferson was also very interested in the expansion of the US into the West beyond the Appalachian Mountains. He saw the West as a tremendous opportunity for hard-working average Americans, and not the province of elite speculators. The Louisana Purchase and the Lewis and Clark expedition were bold and promising acts.
   
   The Jefferson Presidency had to contend with the wounded Federalists, including their personal attacks concerning Jefferson's religion and character. In addition, the French-English conflict escalated in his second term and resulted in wholesale predations on American commercial ships. The Embargo Act, enacted to curtail opportunities for conflict, was highly unpopular and unsuccessful.
   
   The author does discuss the contradictions of Jefferson. Jefferson extolled the essential equality of all men and promoted widespread political participation. Yet he could not extend that concept fully to Negroes or to native Indians. It is a troublesome inconsistency, but the huge impact that Jefferson had on the direction that the political culture took in the US cannot be overlooked. It is inaccurate to suggest that the author excoriates Jefferson through a political correctness lens.
   
   The book is not an exhaustive study of Jefferson; it is not supposed to be. Jefferson does deserve to be rated as a president just behind FDR or Lincoln. His Presidency represents a decided shift from an elitist political culture to one far more democratic, hardly an insignificant development in a democracy. The author makes that point quite well.

5 comments about George W. Bush: Portrait of a Leader.

1. It amazes me that even one person can like this president. He has done nothing but bury this country into the ground in which it will take years to recover from. This is what a customer wrote in the positive reviews on this book. I am trying really hard not to laugh and cry at the same time.
   -------------------------------------------------------------------------
   "I applaud the great leadership abilities of our President and I am sure many Americans will join me. Among the achievements that are behind him (and I am sure that there is time left during the presidency for many more):
   - Has made healthcare affordable for all Americans
   - Has created millions of jobs with joblessnes at record lows
   - Has won the war on terrorism
   - Has brokered lasting peace in the Middle East and Far East
   - Has made all countries in Middle East embrace democracy, with
   some of them already prosperous democracies in a short span
   - Has secured the trust of both the aisles of the Congress to
   legislate policies beneficial to all Americans into law
   - Has made cheap sources of energy available to Americans
   that we can all use into the foreseeable future
   - Has made American economy strong at least for the rest of this
   century
   - Has made budget and trade deficits a thing of the past
   - Has made America the leader of the free world after a period
   when we were thought as a pushover by terrorists
   - Has restored America to play its destined role as the leader of
   the free world
   I am sure there are many more that can be added to this list. Let us all wish our President continued success."
   --------------------------------------------------------------------------
   WHAT?!?!?!?!?!?!? Are you kidding me? Every single one of these so called achievements are so obviously false. It makes me wonder if these supporters of his actually have any common sense at all. What is it that they see in this guy? Makes me sick to think that half of America voted for this guy(twice). Thankfully, we only have a few more months of this garbage to take.



2. I don't believe George Bush is a good leader. I think he'd be hard pressed to achieve mediocre. But having said that, reading this book touched me...Bush supporters, for whatever reason, try very hard to create a decent person out of the pieces of George Bush. The authors' use of soundbites, and quotes taken from speeches created by slick PR men. They spiced it with a bunch of staged photo ops and dished out a Potemkin Bush to pin their respect and hopes upon. This is truly touching in its naivete. Who can't sympathize with the authors and their desire to make the President a better man than he is. They want so much for him to be the kind of leader they hoped he would become, that they imagine hints of this in the most trivial and staged of incidents. And I wholeheartedly agree, in a way. I would much rather have a President of whom I could speak proudly, a man I respected for his intelligence and ability to see through the political pettiness and indeed take the course best for America. That's the president I want, that's the president they want. Neither of us have him...but the authors are trying to build one out of sticks and straws. For a long time, I prayed that George Bush would grow with the office. It never happened...but that's not something for those on the left to smirk and joke about. It's a shame for all Americans. And from this book, we can see how deeply those on the right have been wounded by the President's lack of integrity, leadership and ability, to the point where they will hallucinate a leader where none exists. It's sad, on all sides.



3. People who hate Bush will hate the book. People who like Bush will like the book. 'Nuff said.



4. This book was a wonderful read. I am just glad the left-wing cowardly traitors that are reviewing this book, that they certainly did not read or for most of them - did not have someone read it to them, are not leading this country. These liberal cowards would have invited our enemies to attack our country; as long as they did not kill any innocent unborn babies - that right belongs to the pro-choicers. Anyway, real Americans with faith will enjoy this book. Thank God for a President with convictions, morals and values. Oh yeah, I keep hearing about how stupid, unintelligent, or ignorant our President is. I wonder how many of these traitors are Yale and Harvard graduates. Thank you President Bush for not allowing these cowardly Americans to destroy our country.



5. Portrait of a leader? The name of the author of this nonsense should be enough to set off a very loud alarm. Karen Hughes is not by any stretch of the imagination an objective journalist. She was, in fact, instrumental in getting this moron elected in 2000. If I could have rated this book "negative five stars" I would have done so. Knowing what we now know, "Portrait of a Leader" will be remembered as a curiosity and nothing more. It does have value, though. Anything that tries to portray our half-witted president (the "First Fool" as I call him) as a capable, intelligent commander-in-chief, is going to be chock full of unintentional humor - and this book is no exception. Truth be told, it's an absolute scream. For a more realistic look into the career of this disgusting president, please read, SHRUB: The Short, Happy Political life of George W. Bush by Molly Ivins and Lou DuBois. It's alot funnier - but for all the right reasons.
   
   Tom Degan
   Goshen, NY