5 comments about Franklin D. Roosevelt: A Rendezvous with Destiny.

1. I've revisited this book, which I read years ago, with hopes of including it in my set of recent reviews of books about the Depression of the 1930s. I hear so much ill-informed chatter from self-defined conservatives about the New Deal that I feel an urge to provide the reading material to deepen their understanding. This book, however, although it is the standard biography of FDR in many college classes, offers very little insight into the New Deal years, spending most of its energy on the later wartime FDR. It is unquestionably a book of muted adulation, almost a hagiography, and Roosevelt detractors will find it shallow and irritating at best. Myself a Roosevelt respecter but not partisan, I find it shallow, also, and particularly where it matters most. Freidel describes the politics of FDR's "court packing" failure without analyzing what was really at stake and to what degree FDR's threats forced the American judiciary to reformulate much of the law of labor relations to suit a mixed liberal democracy (liberal in the classic economic sense).
   It's not only quixotic but also destructive to swelter in anarcho-capitalist or libertarian myths about FDR and the New Deal. Critics of Roosevelt are advised at least to know their man.



2. Obviously, a life like Roosevelt's is hard to condense into just one book due to the breadth of its importance and his impact on U.S. history. FDR's complex personality makes it even more difficult. Frank Freidel does a pretty good job of it in "A rendezvous with Destiny." The book starts with a brief look at FDR's early life, and ends with his death just after Yalta. The bulk of the book covers his political years.
   
   I really liked Freidel's account of FDR trying to manipulate gold prices. You really get a good behind the scenes look of FDR trying to implement his programs in the early 1930's. You will discover that FDR was fairly quick to catch on to the danger that Hitler presented to the free world. Amazingly, you will discover how the attack by Japan on Pearl Harbor was either partially brought about, or brought about more quickly by a clerical error while FDR was on one of his many vacations.
   
   I really enjoyed this book. Even if you are a well seasoned student of history, you will find a lot of little known facts, mostly behind the scenes details, in this fine work by Freidel. A great place to start your study of FDR's amazing life.



3. Frank Freidel has written a pretty good book about one of our most complex and admired presidents, but it certainly is not exhaustive. Freidel goes a good job explaining the who, what, where and when, but leaves out the all-important "why" in many of FDR's decisions. I would have loved to read more of FDR's thought processes and what went into his various decisions, especially at the all-important "Big 3" meetings at Tehran and Yalta. For instance, in David McCullough's Pulitzer-Prize winning tome, "Truman," we get plenty of meat on Truman's thoughts during the Potsdam conference - words from his diaries, notes to subordinates, etc. McCullough gives readers dozens and dozens of pages on Truman's analysis and thought processes during the critical conference. In contrast, readers really don't get terrific, exhaustive details in Freidel's book, and it's a letdown. These details separate a good presidential biography from a great one.
   
   However, this is not a horrible book by any stretch. The author offers readers plenty about the 1932 election, FDR's disastrous decision to pack the Supreme Court, his thoughts and actions following Pearl Harbor, FDR's wartime strategy on the home front, his four presidential elections and even his death on April 12, 1945. Freidel covers the milestones of FDR's presidency well, but the devil is in the details. While I have not yet read Conrad Black's mammoth 1,200-page bio on FDR, one would hope it goes deeper than Freidel's 600-page tome. This book is recommended as a starter, or as part of a series of books to understand and study FDR.



4. Frank Freidel of Harvard is the greatest historian of Franklin Roosevelt. Freidel spent years researching Roosevelt. He documented more interviews of people in Roosevelt's life than any other historian. His contribution to the historiography of Franklin Roosevelt is unsurpassed.
   
   Freidel originally wrote an outstanding four-volume biography of Franklin Roosevelt that meticulously detailed FDR's life from childhood, through his ordeal with polio, to the early years of FDR's presidency. Read that well-written biography if you want a deep understanding of the man and his times. Freidel never finished that multi-volume biography of Roosevelt into the war years; it was suppose to be six volumes.
   
   Instead, Freidel wrote this excellent one-volume Roosevelt biography called Rendezvous with Destiny, which condenses Freidel's lifelong research into one volume. The coverage of FDR's early years and Eleanor Roosevelt's story are especially excellent. This is the standard reference biography of Franklin Roosevelt by probably the best historian of Roosevelt.
   
   This biography starts with a superb background into Roosevelt's early life in upper class New York. His personal life was fascinating. FDR was born secure and confident. His mother was assertive and doted on her only child. Franklin attended Groton and Harvard. He loved to sail and greatly admired his cousin Theodore Roosevelt. He courted Eleanor, married, and then chose a life of public service - then a nasty world of politics. This biography details Roosevelt's New Deal programs, how he achieved his legislative goals, and who the other players were. Freidel briefly, yet vividly, describes the Great Depression era. If you read only one book about Franklin Roosevelt, this would probably be your best choice.
   
   However, I thought that something was missing. Because Freidel of Harvard sticks closely to the strict rules of historians, he rarely provides opinions or commentary. There are no opinionated points of view - just the accurate events of FDR and his times. The book could have been better at describing the epic drama of World War II.
   
   Readers should supplement this book with a great book on World War II, such as the masterpiece A World at Arms: A Global History of World War II by Gerhard Weinberg or the masterpiece Rise And Fall Of The Third Reich by William Shirer. After first reading Freidel's biography of FDR, I would then read the massive Franklin Delano Roosevelt: Champion Of Freedom by Conrad Black, which covers the war years extensively and brilliantly, and is loaded with opinions and juicy insider tidbits.
   
   For the Great Depression years, readers should consider Arthur Schlesinger's three-volume Age of Roosevelt history of the Great Depression era. If you are interested further in FDR's fascinating private life, read Geoffrey Ward's award-winning A First-Class Temperament: The Emergence of Franklin Roosevelt.
   
   This book would be a great first book to read about FDR. If you were to judge this book on historical accuracy, then you would have to give the book the highest rating possible. However, people highly interested in the era, especially the war, will need to read other books.



5. Was FDR one of the four or five greatest American presidents, a man who worked tirelessly to alleviate the suffering caused by the Great Depression and who was instrumental in our victory in WWII, or was he a conniving manipulator who took unfair advantage of the fact that the depression started during his predecessor's term, and played politics with the suffering of millions in order to consolidate his and his party's power base, at the cost of establishing an entitlement culture that is even now, 60 years later, still sapping the vitality from the great American tradition of self-reliance?

   If you have an opinion on the answer to this question going into this book, your answer will determine your opinion of the book, for the book is unquestionably (and unsurprisingly; biographers only rarely take the time to study and write about a subject they dislike) pro-Roosevelt. If you had no idea that such a question existed, this book certainly won't make you aware of it, and you may well find it a very valuable and informative biography. But if you, like me, were aware that the question existed and were undecided on the answer to it coming in, this book gives very little information to help resolve the debate, because it is so unshakably favorable that it discounts, rather than attempting to refute, the arguments defending an anti-Roosevelt viewpoint. As such, it is virtually impossible to judge, based on the information given here, the value of the man, because the information is simply not produced dispassionately enough.

2 comments about Mandela: A Critical Life.

1. In just a little over 200 pages, "Mandela: A Critical Life" tells the story of how Nelson Mandela rose to the top of the African National Congress and emerged as an icon in South African politics. The author taught political science at Wits University, has good contacts in the ANC, and is an expert on black politics in South Africa. His book is a masterpiece of insight and compression. That said, it is not for beginners looking for straightforward biography. The text follows Mandela's life and career chronologically, but the analysis/biography ratio is high, and readers without background knowledge of 20th century South African history would be quite lost.



2. I had read Nelson Mandela's autobiography "Long Walk to Freedom" some time ago. I was hoping to find an objective and complimentary third party analysis of his extraordinary story. I am happy to say that Tom Lodge's book provided me exactly with what I was looking for. Lodge has authored a persuasive and unbiased examination of the public and private life of one of 20th century's greatest men.
   
   The book provides a fascinating view on the crafting of the Mandela icon by himself and those around him. It is also interesting to understand the details that Mandela has consciously chosen not to include in his autobiography, such as, for example, some of the more humiliating treatments inflicted on him by South African prison guards.
   
   Considering the book's relatively short length, Lodge's assessment of the important events underlying Mandela's life is, in many cases, remarkably extensive, often considering the view of multiple sources from varying stand points. That being said, Mandela's political development, especially in the period of time prior to his long term imprisonment, is multifaceted and involves a large number of people and organizations. As a result, readers for whom this is an introduction to Mandela's story might be better off starting with his autobiography, "Long Walk to Freedom", and reading Lodge's work as an excellent second book on this subject.

2 comments about Thomas Jefferson: Westward the Course of Empire (Biographies in American Foreign Policy).

1. Kaplan debunks the theory that Jefferson was an idealist in foreign affairs. Jefferson was pragmatic on what he wanted. He was for the United States, and thus made alliances based on what was best for our country. Even though he thought the French Revolution was justified, his reason for supporting the French was as a counterweight to Great Britain. Jefferson may have been accused of some silly things such as the embargo and trying to cozy up to Great Britain at the last minute, but his actions were that of a nationlist, and not an idealist.
   
   The language in this book is a little stilted. In some places, it is hard to read. However, this book gives a good summary of Jefferson's foreign policy.



2. Kaplan clearly likes Jefferson. His recounting of Jefferson's foreign policy tend to give Jefferson the benefit of the doubt. This book is very informational and fairly short at around 200 pages. I harbor many Jeffersonian ideological thoughts, however, I'd have preferred Kaplan to be a bit more critical of some of Jefferson's actions. Even so, the book still stands out as a good survey of Jefferson's foreign policy. 3 stars for a good book- but not exceptional.

5 comments about President Reagan: The Triumph of Imagination.

1. The purpose of any book review is to give the reader enough information to decide if they want to invest the time and money in reading the book in its entirety. Richard Reeves, a distinguished former reporter for "The New York Times," has tackled a difficult subject in writing a biography of a politician who still engenders strong emotions in people of a positive and negative nature. You need not share Ronald Reagan's politics (Reeves does not), to find this an interesting and enjoyable read.
   
   From the subtitle, Reeves makes his interpretation clear. Reagan was not "a tired old man we elected king," but rather a bold, dynamic politician who left behind a strong and powerful legacy. This book is revisionist in that it challenges the idea that Reagan was often "absent without leave" while in office. Reeves has done a good job of developing Reagan's voice, using notes, letters, and other records that the President left behind. Much of what he uses is new.
   
   Reagan was, according to Reeves, a big idea man. He thought up new ideas and left the details to others. In comparison, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill thought up big, creative ideas and had a good sense of strategy, but also liked to interject himself into the implementation of these ideas. Jimmy Carter, who was at the White House just before Reagan, had little vision and tended to interject himself into the implementation of policy even when he had a limited understanding of the topic. Reagan was often faulted in office for being detached from his job--like when no one on his staff woke him up to inform him of a dog fight between U.S. and Libyan fighter planes--but given the number of issues that one address in the Oval Office, his interest in the big picture looks pretty sound to Reeves.
   
   This book has its limits, though. This is not a full-fledged biography. Reeves looks just at the presidential years. Readers wanting to know about Reagan's background will be disappointed. Reflecting his training as a political reporter, Reeves shows a preference for the political process rather than policy. He skips some of the weightier issue that Presidents address like international finance, commerce, and trade policy. These topics get at best only superficial coverage. Reeves does focuses on tax and budget issues, which were of great interest to Reagan. Like many Presidents, Reagan often had enormous influence on areas that were of little personal interest to him and by ignoring these topics, Reeves does not do full justice to his subject.
   
   Still, as a first draft of history, this ain't too bad.



2. Historian Richard Reeves, who has made a literary career exploring the White House years of many of the more recent occupants of the Oval Office wrote last year's best selling non-fiction book `President Reagan: The Triumph of Imagination,' a biographical examination of America's 40th president.
   
   This work on Reagan's time in Washington is Reeves' eleventh book and his third biography of a chief executive's tenure solely in the White House. He previously wrote about the presidential reign of Richard Nixon and John Kennedy. He is currently the Senior Lecturer at the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Southern California and a syndicated columnist whose column has appeared in more than 100 newspapers since 1979.
   
   Reeves published his first book, `A Ford, not a Lincoln' in 1975. His tome `President Kennedy: Profile of Power' is considered the authoritative work on the 35th president and won several national awards including being named the Best Non-Fiction Book of 1993 by Time Magazine and Book of the Year by the Washington Monthly.
   
   Twenty-six years after Ronald Reagan became president and changed the course of America, Reeves has written a surprising and revealing portrait of one of the most important leaders of the twentieth century. As he did in his bestselling books `President Kennedy: Profile of Power' and `President Nixon: Alone in the White House,' Reeves used newly declassified documents and hundreds of interviews to show a president at work day by day, sometimes minute by minute over the 40th president's two terms by selecting certain highlights in his eight years in office.
   
   'President Reagan: The Triumph of Imagination' is the story
   of an accomplished politician, a bold, sometimes reckless leader, a gambler of what he believed to be right, a man who imagined an American past and an American future and made them real.
   
   Reagan is revealed to be a man of ideas who changed the world for better or worse with his own vision of good and right, a leader who understood that words are often more important than deeds in dealing with others, whether they be aides, the public, politicians with opposing viewpoints or world leaders. Reeves shows a man who understood how to be the president, who realized that the job is not to manage the government but to lead the nation. Reeves writes that in many ways, especially in the conservative movement of today a quarter of a century later, Reagan is still leading the charge.
   
   As his vice president, George H. W. Bush, said after Reagan was shot in an assassination attempt and hospitalized in March, 1981, "We will act as if he were here."
   
   Reeves shows Reagan to be a heroic figure if not always a hero. He did not destroy communism, as his champions claim, but knew it would self-destruct and hastened the collapse by the build-up of America's military might in the 1980's. He believed the Soviet Union was evil and had contempt for the established American policies of containment and détente that was advocated by his many contemporaries and prior presidential officeholders. Asked about his own Cold War strategy, he answered, "We win. They lose!"
   
   Like one of his own personal heroes, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Reagan became larger than life. But as Roosevelt became an icon central to American liberalism, Reagan was the nucleus holding together American conservatism. He is the only president whose name became a political creed, a noun not an adjective: `Reaganism.'
   
   Reeves claims through his liberal bias that Reagan's ideas were so old they seemed new. He preached individualism that many found to be inspiring yet also cruel. He dumbed-down America, brilliantly blending fact and fiction, transforming political debate into emotion-driven entertainment. He recklessly mortgaged America with uncontrolled military spending, less taxation, and more debt.
   
   In focusing on the key moments of the Reagan presidency, Reeves recounts the amazing resiliency of Reagan as the real `comeback kid,' long before the term was used on Bill Clinton. Here is a seventy-year-old man coming back from a near-fatal gunshot wound, from cancer, from the worst recession in American history. Then, in personal despair as his administration was shredded by the lying and secrets of hidden wars and double-dealing, he was able to forge one of history's amazing relationships with the leader of `the Evil Empire.' That story is told for the first time using the transcripts of the Reagan-Gorbachev meetings, the climax of an epic story, as if he were here to tell us in how own unique style.
   
   After Dwight Eisenhower's two full terms, we had five presidents in a row who didn't complete eight years in office until Reagan did so twenty-eight years later. Now we're going to have two chief executives in a row who will have served two terms. Is this now considered to be a new trend started again by Reagan or a continuance of what once was the norm of presidential politics that was maintained by George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and others in the course of American history?



3. I have to admit that I was not a fan of President Reagan's during his presidency. In my own words, I thought that "the Iran-Contra affair was the biggest threat to our democracy since Nixon trying to hold on to the presidency after Watergate". I have since changed my mind, at least on President Reagan, and even on Oliver North, who I have had the pleasure of meeting at a book signing.
   
   I have to admit that I find Reeves' rehashing of the Reagan years enlightening in that I had forgotten so much of what had gone on, and it was interesting to read some of the behind the scenes details, although I had to wonder where some of the information came from. There were times when Reeves just could not avoid the backhanded remark, which was irritating at times. I also felt that he was struggling when he had to say something that might be construed as positive about Reagan. Be that as it may, it wasn't a bad read if you take into account the writer's view.
   
   Ronald Reagan certainly had his flaws. Everyone does. Great people are not always great people behind closed doors. This does not diminish the fact that they rose to the occasion when it presented itself, and one way or the other made the right decision. After reading Reeves' book, I came to the conclusion that the United States would be a much lesser county without Ronald Reagan.
   
   Reeves' book also convinced me that we need a great leader, much like Ronald Reagan, again. We need a leader who not only has the courage to make the tough, unpopular, decisions, but who can also communicate their beliefs in such a way that inspires the Nation, and the world, to do great things.
   
   If you can filter the author's bias, then I would recommend the book. The advantage of the author's bias is that what may have been glossed over, ignored, or buried under the apologetics of a completely pro-Reagan author, comes out in the raw with maybe some opinionated remarks. The reader can then weed out the remarks and come to their own conclusion.



4. Richard Reeves frequently lets his personal liberal bias get in the way of recognizing Reagan's greatness as a leader. He makes many insinuations that Reagan is lazy. Reeves has difficulty recognizing that Reagan had a plan to rebuild the United States from the Carter negatives to the Reagan positives. Still, in all, the biography of his presidency allows the Regan personality and magnetism to shine through Reeves' negativism.



5. I'm not sure what book some of the reviewers here are reading, but it cannot be the same tome. Some claim this book is contemptuous towards Reagan, but I cannot detect a hint of that so-called "contempt" in this book, and this is coming from someone who believes that Reagan was the best President of the past fifty years, though obviously that is not saying much. Rather, what I see is a revealing, fair account of Reagan and his legacy. Certainly, many sections of the book do not give Reagan as much credit as I feel he deserves, but that is the great beauty of an unbiased biography, rather than an overly sycophantic or critical one - you get to see Reagan not as a God, but as the wrinkled, tired and yet majestic lion in winter that he really was. In all honesty, the book is so scrupulously fair to Reagan that though there were times when I believed the author was a closet conservative and still other times when I thought he must be a flaming liberal, those moments were so fleeting as to be mere flashes of consciousness - now here, now gone. In the capacity of being balanced, Mr. Reeves' biography is an enviable achievement. My one complaint is that the biography only covers Reagan's presidency, without his earlier years as context, but perhaps that is to desire too much of a good thing. Ultimately, whether you like Reagan or not, you will find something to enjoy in this book, though you may also find yourself occasionally shifting uncomfortably in your seat as the reality of his Presidency gently intrudes on your mind.

5 comments about Mary Todd Lincoln: A Biography.

1. This book is a complete biography of Mary Todd Lincoln starting out with her grandparents which surprised me. This book is not an overview of Mary's life it is very detailed. I think it is a fair account of her life and there are some things I never would have guessed. I must admit I haven't finished the book as yet it is not one of those books you finish off in one afternoon, but I have read enough of it to know that a 4 star review is accurate.



2. Mary Todd Lincoln had a rough life. From the early death of her mother to the treatment she recieved from her stepmother, to her husband's assissination and was committed to an asylum by her own son. Reading the biography it was hard not to feel sorry for her. I knew naturally (as everyone) about her husband's assissination but I was surprised about how hard the rest of her life was. Her son Robert committed and she had to fight to get out of the asylum. Her early years Mary spent having to put up with a stepmother who wanted her husband's first set of children completely forgotten. Poor girl.



3. very comprehensive study of a woman who began life as a spoiled child, but got kicked in the butt by life. she sedated herself with extravagance and meaninglessness. one of the most tragic things in her life was the betrayal by her son, who used his influence to have her declared insane so that he could obtain control over her money. that had to be as painful to endure as the assassination of her husband and the deaths of her two younger sons. i feel nothing but empathy for this poor woman.



4. This is the seminal biography for Mary Todd Lincoln and one of the best biographies you will ever read. After reading dozens of books about Mrs. Lincoln to write my novel about her insanity trial (A Warrant For Mrs. Lincoln), I always came back to Jean Baker's book for information and insight into the Lincoln family. If you have an endless fascination for the Lincoln family, this book is a must.



5. Couldn't put this book down.....Jean Baker wrote a truly remarkable narrative non-fiction. I had previously read another fictional "Mary" book and was surprised to see that both books were similar in historical data surrounding her (Mary's) life. One can only imagine losing so many children and then one's husband, and NOT being driven to doing odd things. The psyche is a strange science marked by extraordinary and mysterious sensivities to outside pressures.

3 comments about Lincoln's Rise to the Presidency.

1. William C. Harris, professor emeritus of history at North Carolina State University, fully deserved the Henry Adams Prize for 2008 from the Society for History in the Federal Government for this pathbreaking book, "Lincoln's Rise to the Presidency," published by the University Press of Kansas. In this seminal work, the author presents a very good case for reinterpreting Lincoln in the 1850s not so much as a political moderate but rather as a conservative in the best sense of the term that reflected well his heritage as an old conscience Whig, his background in rural central Illinois, his overall cautious nature, and the internal politics of his home state.
   
   Lincoln had a significant pragmatic streak and was able to bring together diverse interests to establish the Republican Party in Illinois during the 1850s as a coalition of old Whigs (his own political heritage), anti-slavery Democrats, elements of the Know-Nothing Party, and others. The common element of all of these groups was opposition to slavery. Lincoln's moral opposition to slavery was critical throughout this effort, and he gradually became more committed to it, but his political efforts to deal with the institution were fundamentally conserving of the American experiment. This reinterpretation of a much-studied subject is insightful and opens a new perspective on Lincoln's political ideas and influences and offers a fresh understanding of one of the nation's greatest presidents.
   
   "Lincoln's Rise to the Presidency" is a fair and even-handed account by a veteran student of Lincolniana. It seeks to modify the public's perception of Lincoln as a radical; one of the most striking of the transformations that came to his reputation after his April 1865 assassination. It is an excellent work whose interpretation will require careful consideration by all students of the Civil War era.



2. An historian's scholarly and detailed look at the political route taken by Abraham Lincoln to the highest office in our land. Not for the person wanting a general biography of our greatest president.
   
   I liked the fact that Professor Harris avoids injecting into his narrative views on family matters and guesses at psychological motives: this is straight political history. While sometimes the text is dry, if you want to know more about how complex pre-Civil War party politics were juggled by Mr. Lincoln and his key supporters, you would profit from reading this book.



3. Abraham Lincoln was probably our greatest president. Not surprisingly, then, many Lincoln historians have focused the spotlight on his presidency. Others have focused on Lincoln's personal life, and the development of the moral convictions and rhetorical skills that made him successful once in office.
   
   In this fascinating book, William Harris sheds new light on a third aspect of Lincoln -- his leading role in the formation of the Republican party. Lincoln made it a strong party by fusing together two powerful political forces -- the economic conservatism of the old Whigs and the moral conservatism of the new antislavery movement. Harris shows Lincoln's great political skills and shrewdness in building this coalition. Then, standing on that broad and sturdy platform, Lincoln launched his successful run for the presidency. Finally, having won with such a clear mandate, Lincoln had the political power to govern during the turbulence of the Civil War.

2 comments about The Kennedy Mystique: Creating Camelot.

1. The Kennedy Mystique is a wonderful book. My 7 year old Daughter likes to look at the pictures. My Exwife gave me heck because at school my 7 year old Daughter said she was a relative of President Kennedy and none of her classmates believed her and told the teacher she was making up stories. I have computer printouts from Ancestry dot com showing the relationship between my Great Great Grandfather David Doughty Morgan 1851 to 1915 and President Jack Kennedy. Like the early Christians were persecuted I was told I was crazy at my Church for saying I was a blood Kennedy realtive until I brought in the Computer printouts proving this to be true. The coauthor of this book mister Dallek makes the writing about the Kennedy family Prestigious. Dont just look at the pictures, read about Americas greatest Family the Kennedys. My prior reviews about President Kennedy being alive have been deleted. Lets see what happens this time. I invoke freedom of speech for keeping this Amazon review on the internet. Write a response to whether you believe Brad Morgan (Kennedy) is the real American Shadow Vice President a tradition that goes back to 1774 and the Continental Congress and is Constitutional.



2. This book is a Keeper for all J.F.K Fans the world over. I love the excellent visuals and the superb writing from the trendsetters of that era. This book makes you feel as if you are transported back to the early 1960s and you feel as if you are witnessing history from a front seat balcony. Many of the photographs have never been seen before. Pick up this book for your Library today and relive those brief, shining moments in history!
   
   Noel Serrano
   The J.F.K. Group-2007
   
   [...]

3 comments about Ronald Reagan: The Power of Conviction and the Success of His Presidency.

1. This book is based on Peter Wallison's year in the White House when he served as a legal counsel.
   
   This book shares some of Ronald Reagan's wit,humor,and humility.
   
   Mr.Wallison offers an assessment of the media coverage regarding the Reagan administration. The media had a tendency to over-cover the sensational while ignoring subjects of substance,like policy(foreign or domestic).They trolled for scandals.
   
   This book shows what management style was used by the President.
   It also debuncts the myth that President Reagan was not intelligent.
   
   Another interesting topic in this book is the behind the scenes view of situations in the cabinet. Leaks to the media and how rampant they were from the White House and especially the Hill.
   
   There was a comparison of the Chiefs of Staff. Mr. Wallison wrote mostly about Donald Regan because he worked with him.
   
   The chapters dedicated to the Iran-Contra scandal were very good! I came away with a better understanding of exactly what happened and who was involved.
   
   This is the first book that I have read about President Reagan. I recommend it as a balanced book from an author who worked in the White House. I wish that he had been there longer!



2. I love this book as it contains what it means to be a true conservative and not a false one. As the great Conservative economist F.A. Hayek once stated "    . . . the whole conception of social or distributive justice is empty and meaningless; and there will therefore never exist agreement on what is just in this sense... I am certain, however, that nothing has done so much to destroy the juridical safeguards of individual freedom as the striving after this mirage of social justice."
   That is in a Capitalistic Socieity there will be more losers than winners and that is just the way it is. If you can not make ends meet it is not "societys fault" but your own. Don't expect your mommy "the state" to make it right!
   From here the author goes own to explain how all the scandals of the Reagan presidentcy where not the leaders fault but those of his underlings for they were to blaime not him. The buck stops there my friend!



3. This is an excellent "insider" perspective on Reagan's management style and the Iran-Contra scandal. Wallison debunks thoroughly the prevailing view of the liberal media that Reagan was intellectually limited, disengaged and manipulated by his advisors. Reagan's remarkable accomplishments are attributed to the clarity of and his unfailing focus on a few "big ideas" (e.g. a smaller and less intrusive government, freer trade, a strong defense, faith in the traditional American values of individualism and sense of personal responsibility) and his ability to inspire those within the administration to actively pursue his policy objectives. As legal counsel to the President, Wallison was the White House staffer most involved with Iran-Contra. He persuasively argues that the scandal was basically a foreign policy blunder made worse by a renegade NSC staff (particularly Oliver North) and a press corps more interested in scandal mongering than issues.

5 comments about Andrew Johnson : A Biography (Signature Series).

1. I am currently reading a biography of every President in order. Hans Trefousse' biography of Andrew Johnson certainly seemed to be the best choice for a comprehensive biography of our 17th President.
   
   From an academic standpoint, it is hard to criticize Trefousse's work. He has obviously done the necessary research and is thoroughly well versed in the history of the times. Indeed, this biography is complete and in depth enough and should meet most everyone's expectations. Trefousse clearly understands Johnson and his proper relationship to American history. The only reason I was unable to give this biography a full five stars is the writing is a bit uninspired and doesn't achieve a level of excellence that merits special recognition. The book is more than satisfactory in completing its task but ultimately is only going to appeal to those already interested in the subject matter.
   
   After reading this biography I am still of the opinion that it is likely the best one available for Andrew Johnson. Indeed, it certainly exceeds expectations for a comprehensive biography of a relatively unknown President.



2. I read this book in my ongoing project to read a biography of each President. The best part of this book in my opinion was the length. A lot of biographers lengthen their book to a point where it becomes too detailed and hard to read. That was not the case here.
   
   Johnson was not a great president, nor was he a great person. And, other than the Civil War and Reconstruction he didn't have a key stake in American History. Why go overboard? And the author didn't.
   
   I've read many very wonderful presidential biographies. Truman was fantastic and was 900 pages because it shouldn've been. The 3-part bio on Nixon was 1800 pages and should've been because a lot went on during Nixon's life in politics.
   
   This bio, much like the Andrew Jackson bio I read, was between 300 and 400 pages.... detailed enough to tell the story but not detailed to the point where I got lost or just flat lost interest.
   
   I would recommend this book to anyone wanting to read about Andrew Johnson but if you are looking to make a life out of studying the man it is probably not the book for you because it is not overly detailed.
   
   It was exactly what I was looking for though, well-written, well-researched and gave me a good overview of a President that I have always wanted to know more about. He definitely was not of high moral character and definitely played to his southern base with his actions surrounding reconstruction. That said, I did find it interesting that he was demonized at times by both his colleagues and the press.
   
   Sounds like aside from his thinking in regards to blacks and slavery he was a good and honest man that tried to do what was right most of the time. That was something the author did a very good job detailing and I appreciated it.



3. Treffousse's look at the 17th President of the United States is a fair and well-balanced look at this driven politician. The reader will be left with little doubt that Johnson's racism was his biggest flaw in both his political and personal life. The impeachment is featured but does not dominate the book as it should not.



4. While the "personal" Johnson is given adequate attention, this book works so well because it concentrates on the political realm, a rarity in these days of social history and psychoanalytical treatises. Of course, the impeachment trial is of primary interest, but the focus on Johnson's overwhelming ambition was appreciated as well. Despite his stubborn attitude, inflexibility, and undeniable racism, Johnson was a committed Jacksonian and sought throughout his political life to promote policies friendly to his agrarian philosophy. Because his presidency represented a key transition in American history (a definite weakening of the Executive until TR as well as a regrettable loss of Reconstruction opportunities), Johnson is, with Polk, Lincoln, and Jackson, one of the key figures of the 19th century. Overall, a solid book worthy of a wide readership.



5. I found this book was fair to Johnson, despite the author's reputation as friendly to the Radical Republicans. I found myself believing that the failure of the Senate to impeach Johnson was a good thing, since he obviously was not guilty of an impeachable offense--even as our current president was not. Johnson was actually an able politician and a good President, but his bias against blacks caused him to err grievously in regard to them.

5 comments about Andrew Jackson: The Course of American Empire, 1767-1821. Vol. 1.

1. I almost picked a shorter book about Jackson rather than try to tackle this three volume set, but judging by the first volume there is no question I made the right choice!
   
   This is one of the best biographies I've ever read; not only is the subject compelling, but it is superbly written and the balance of information (like the selection of anecdotes and quotes) is perfect. It even includes a timeline and family trees (why don't more authors do this?). Also, Remini isn't afraid to offer analysis as he goes; it makes the book more interesting and I think it ultimately makes it more objective because you understand his biases.
   
   My only quibble, and this is very minor, is the author (or publisher's) decision to blank out the swear words. Jackson swore to great effect, and this quasi-censorship diminishes that effect a little.



2. In the first of three volumes, Remini carries Jackson from birth to the tragic loss of much of his family in the Revolution, through his early years in politics, his duels, and the Battle of New Orleans, up to his term as first American Governor of the territory of Florida, acquired by his own military victories.
   
   Remini admires Jackson, and argues persuasively for his huge historic importance - not just President Jackson, but the younger Jackson of this book, responsible for acquiring a large chunk of what ultimately became the Southeast USA in several Indian wars and treaty negotiations, the campaigns of the War of 1812, and his subsequent attacks on the Spanish colony of Florida. Many historians have condemned Jackson for siezing Florida without the explicit approval of the Monroe administration; Remini is convincing in his argument that Monroe must have known and encouraged Jackson's actions, although he was careful not to say so directly, since Spain and the US were not at war.
   
   Remini doesn't by any means try to whitewash Jackson. The man shown in these pages is impressive but often distinctly unpleasant. Remini quite directly calls him a 'bully', and the story of his feuds and duels shows a man who is ruthless and foolishly ill-tempered. The ugliest part of the Jackson story is his treatment of the native tribes; Remini offers some half-hearted apologias for Jackson's ruthless treatment even of those natives who fought with him in his campaigns, but tells the facts frankly enough that most readers will come to a harsher conclusion.
   
   Remini shows that Jackson's famous victory in the Battle of New Orleans was a closer thing than is generally supposed. Jackson carelessly left a crucial avenue open to the British, and a more determined general would have marched on the city and probably taken it before Jackson had his defenses properly prepared. As it was, the British foolishly gave Jackson sufficient time to settle in and fortify his line, only then attacking it with disastrous results. Although this battle is often viewed as an afterthought (the Treaty of Ghent, ending the war, was actually signed a few days before the battle was fought), Remini also shows that a British victory would have had real, and catastrophic, consequences for the US.
   
   Along with the colorful and often complex story of Jackson's life and activities, Remini fills in the story with good explanations of the conditions of the period. In particular, he gives a good explanation of the values and traits of westerners, and East-West conflicts, at an early time in the country's history when the Pacific was barely dreamed of and the 'Far West' meant the Mississippi.
   
   Remini's writing is excellent, and the biography is detailed and exhaustively researched without being pedantic or boring.



3. Andrew Jackson is one of the more complicated figures in American history. On the one hand, his significance to the development of the United States as a nation is large. On the other hand, he was often a very unpleasant person.

   This first volume in Robert Remini's biography follows Jackson's life from his childhood through his governorship of Florida. Along the way, we learn of Jackson's brief roles in both houses of Congress and his period as a judge; it is later, however, when he joined the military (becoming a general through politics rather than merit), that Jackson rose to nationwide prominence, especially his overwhelming humiliation of the British in the Battle of New Orleans and his later dealings with Indians and the Spanish which led eventually to the U.S. acquiring Florida.

   His military victories made him one of the most popular people in American history, but Remini pulls no punches with Jackson's flaws, including his often brutal and bullying nature and his tendency to violence. The ambiguous circumstances involving how he married his wife Rachel would lead to nasty talk during his presidential campaigns and his killing of a man in a duel (was it murder?) wouldn't help either.

   Having been previously exposed to Remini's writing through his brilliant biographies of Henry Clay and Daniel Webster, I knew this book would be a pleasure to read, and it was. Remini has written the definitive biography of Jackson, very detailed but always objective and always entertaining. If you want to learn of this era and of one its pivotal figures, this is the book to read (plus the other two in the series).




4. One might argue that the hallmark of great men is that they fundamentally and permanently alter the world they inherited - its beliefs, its practices, its conception of itself. Andrew Jackson is one of those extremely rare individuals.

   In this first of three volumes, which he subtitles "The Course of American Empire," Remini highlights the central role that Jackson played in opening up the early American frontier in the first decades of the 19th century. Long before the expression "Manifest Destiny" ignited the expansionist and nationalist passions of Americans in the 1840s, Andrew Jackson fought single-handedly - and occasionally circumvented direct military orders, the Constitution, local judges, and officially recognized international treaties - to advance American territorial expansion along the southern border and promote the removal of the Spanish, British and myriad tribes of native Americans.

   Other salient events that Remini chronicles in this volume include Jackson's humble roots and tragic childhood during the American Revolution in the Carolinas; his move westward to the Tennessee territory to start life anew as a lawyer; the "facts" behind Jackson's much-disputed relationship with his wife, Rachel; his entry into local politics and emergence as a militia leader; his military exploits against the Creeks, the British at the Battle of New Orleans and the Seminoles; and, of course, the many duels, fist-fights and other outlandish events of his early life that he somehow managed to survive.

   Much of Volume I reads like a "wild west" novel, but Remini is careful to accentuate how Jackson's natural rough hewn character, along with his experience on the frontier, melded to shape a political philosophy that ultimately altered the course of American government. There is little direct reference to the principles that would become known as Jacksonian Democracy in this volume - an undying faith in the virtue and wisdom of the people, the inviolability of the Union, the pernicious effects of deficit spending and "soft" currency, etc. - but it is easy to understand how and why Jackson cherished those ideals after reading the story of his early life.

   Finally, it must be noted that Remini assiduously avoids holding Jackson's conduct in relation to slavery and the Indians to modern standards. In all fairness, that is understandable and not especially offensive. However, Remini does neither himself nor Jackson any service by going out of his way to stress how relatively humane (in Remini's mind) the president was to his human chattel and explaining that he really had the Indians best interests at heart when he forced them from their land to the barren plains of modern day Oklahoma. In this volume and the others, Remini offers some strongly worded criticism of Jackson's political, military and social performance, but his many heinous crimes against humanity are treated with kid gloves throughout.




5. This meticulously researched and wonderfully written book is the first volume in a three-part biography of Jackson that will undoubtedly set the standard for years to come.
   Part of what makes Remini's work so useful is that he does not rely solely on American sources but has also dug deep into the Archivo General de Indies in Seville, Spain in order to try to see Jackson from the viewpoint of the Spanish colonial government. It was this research that led Remini to his main thesis in this book which is that Jackson, thru his military exploits against the Indians of the southern United States (notably the Creek, Choctaw, Cherokee, Seminole and Chickasaw tribes) and against the Spanish in Florida did as much or more than any other individual to extend U.S. territory into much of Kentucky, Tennessee, Georgia, Alabama, and all of Florida. One of the more interesting revelations of the book for me was the mutual admiration and the shared goals at this point in their lives between Jackson and Monroe's Secretary of State, John Quincy Adams.
   In fact, Remini makes a good argument that Jackson's military exploits in that region were is what enabled Adams to deal so successfully with the Spanish in negotiating the Trans-Continental Treaty of 1819. This treaty formalized the recognition of the European powers of the territory added to the U.S. by Jefferson in the Louisiana Purchase. Up until then the purchase was widely recognized as illegal.
   So why don't I give this book a higher rating? I think that Remini falls prey to a common tendency of American historians who take on the task of writing the lives of our great men. As a reading public, we do not seem to want to acknowledge the dark side of our leaders or our history. As a result, it is difficult to write biographies that do not border on hagiography. Remini for the most part avoids this failing. He is clear about Jackson's violent (murderous, really) temper, his tendency to bully others until they gave in and his paternalism. This is not a man I would have wanted to know.
   Where Remini does not quite live up to his own standards is in regards to Jackson's (to my mind) overt racism. Jackson regarded the presence of the Indians anywhere in territory that was being settled by Americans as unacceptable unless the Indians were willing to give up their tribal territories, accept a farming plot and become good little American citizens. Remini tries to convince his readers that Jackson the paternalist hated only the tribes not the individual Indians and that therefore Jackson and his policies were not racist (see the discussion on p. 337). I leave it up to the reader of this review whether this defense is adequate. I think that the last fifty years has amply proved that a racist can befriend individual members of the hated group as long as that individual keeps their place. I think that this is actually a rather common type of racism and Jackson exemplifies to a plentitude. To be fair to both Remini and Jackson he had a life long history of defending the underdog if they applied to him for protection.
   Of course, this makes Jackson a paragon of the southern culture of the time but we also need to be honest about our own history. Jackson was a racist, he initiated Indian policies that were, at the least, marginally genocidal (the Indians called Jackson, Sharp Knife) and he was still one of our greatest men, one who had an enormous influence on our historical destiny. Remini, the good honest scholar that he is, gives us enough material and detail so that we get enough of the story so that we can sort out our own vision of the truth.