5 comments about Diagnosing Jefferson.

1. This book is certainly 1 of the few positive and aspiring BOOKS ON THE TOPIC and it's publisher is the leader in books for this topic. This book if the topic was more known and popular would definantly be a bestseller! This book isn't to hard to understand but I wouldn't give it to a young child. I think it would bore them/be to advanced writing and some of the concepts. However, telling them stuff from it maybe very helpful in your own words! I'm Dyslexic too and so reading comprehension is hard for me too but, I didn't unlike ussually need a thesaurus or dictionary sitting besides me while reading this. This book is far better then the Positive Aspergers Role model book. But, if you want a cut and dry guide to diagnose someone with Asperger's this isn't the book for you. I guess part of what I didn't like was that TEMPLE GRANDID contributed to the book. I love her and her famous bestselling book THINKING IN PICTURES (WHICH BUY THE WAY IS GRT AT HELPING YOU TO DISTINGISH THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN HIGH FUNCTIONING AUTISM AND aSPERGER'S but; she isn't an Asperger individual. AnD high functioning AUTISM WHICH IS WHAT SHE HAS ISN'T THE SAME. SO, THEY SHOULD HAVE USED SOMEONE ASPIRING TODAY WITH ASPERGER'S TO WRITE HER SECTION. HER COMMENTS DON'T BELONG HERE.



2. Thank you so much for this book!! I am a parent of a child not yet diagnosed. I found this book very enlightening in regards to my son. Although we may never know for sure if these famous people would have been diagnosed as such today, it does give insight and hope. Insight into their thinking processes and hope for their educational aspirations. It was encouraging to me to know that "famous" people are effected, too. Although it cannot be cured, it can be overcome and life goals can be reached.



3. Mr. Bernstein, if you hadn't personalized your review so much, I think some of your arguments would be more credible. However, attacking the author in such a personal way is a bore. As someone with a full blown DSM IV diagnosis of Asperger's Syndrome, I would suggest that you also may be on the spectrum based on your 20 year obsession with all things Jefferson.



4. To judge this book properly, it helps to consider the impact it has made on people's lives since it was first published five years ago. DIAGNOSING JEFFERSON has offered thousands of readers and their families more than hope--that an idiosyncratic life can be rewarding and constructive. It has brought much peace to families formerly distraught over harsh-sounding diagnoses and the prospect of entrapment in the labyrinth of autism.
   
   The author has been careful not to say that Thomas Jefferson had Asperger's Syndrome. Instead, this well-researched work has made the point that the aggregate of Jefferson's well-reported odd behavior is compatible with those traits we now classify scientifically as Asperger's--that there is a preponderance of evidence that the Third President was at least on the autism/Asperger's continuum, or spectrum.
   
   Scholars who have spent the better part of their lives studying this complex Founder have scratched their heads for two centuries over Thomas Jefferson's unexplained quirks. At the time it was demonstrated by DNA examination that his paternity of Sally Hemings's children was likely, if not a provable fact, there was a minor media frenzy. And during that print and broadcast attention, NBC's TODAY show featured an interview with Dianne Swann-Wright of the Thomas Jefferson Foundation. Her frank admission on camera January 27, 2000, said it all: "There was a personal side of Thomas Jefferson that many of us just simply haven't been able to understand."
   
   A shortage of understanding is also at the crux of the uneasy relationship that exists between the world of "Aspies" and those of us who are "neurotypical." In many ways this book has bridged that gap.
   
   While strong on secondary sources to illustrate historical biographers' admissions of puzzlement about Jefferson's behavior, the book has also revealed what this condition of Asperger's Syndrome is all about, where it is likely to become a fork in a person's road through life.
   
   Strong also on tracing features of Jefferson's long and productive life, this work has proved sympathetic, or at least understanding, of the Founder in his choices--one of the few treatments of Jefferson in print that has regarded him as a human being, not as an icon or eternally unknowable saint.
   
   The most obvious failing of the critics of this book is their predisposition to judge without actually examining the work for what it illustrates, for the evidence it presents in full context, and for what it asks us to consider reasonably. They make it plain they have never actually read DIAGNOSING JEFFERSON. They condemn the notion that Jefferson's vast collection of idiosyncrasies can be matched against diagnostic criteria that have been developed over the past fifteen years and that the collections can be found compatible. Is this work a diagnosis? Possibly. In the absence of any other explanation for the sweeping array of coincidences we are given to ponder, reason would incline the open-minded toward the affirmative.
   
   The author's use of such secondary sources as Brodie, Malone, Peterson, Jordan, and other respected scholars--his presentation of their findings--has been unassailable. To wander here and there and claim, "Oh, well, there is another explanation for that quirk of TJ's," ignores the presentation of the whole picture and the conclusion it has suggested. Such diversion is nit-picking and the sign of a mind that is prematurely closed. As further illustration of that, on several occasions the author has attempted direct contact with critics in order to debate areas of disagreement, only to be rebuffed impatiently or ignored.
   
   In a time when scientists are attempting to cope with a possible epidemic of the spectrum condition of autism, when parents are looking for answers about a condition that continues to elude full understanding, open-mindedness seems a better approach to the suggestions of DIAGNOSING JEFFERSON and other studies than slamming the door on writers' and scholars' findings. For those perpetually puzzled about Thomas Jefferson's oddities, this book may have connected the right dots. What has made it so compelling is that no one else has ever tried to connect the dots at all.
   
   As for the author's claim that there is no other known condition that matches so well the entire range of Jefferson's quirkiness, that continues to stand after five years of this thesis's circulation and consideration. Think of the lesson, "If it walks like a duck, etc."
   
   The publisher, Future Horizons, Inc., gambled and gave the book a good initial run as its first hardcover. While it is not a bestseller, it went into a second printing in hardcover last year. The appeal was that this work has given dimensions to Thomas Jefferson that few writers--perhaps Brodie, perhaps Jordan--have made any effort to present. That appeal attracted first a mainstream publisher in metro New York that was in financial trouble and had to abandon the work, then Future Horizons, a specialty publisher in the field of autism.
   
   Many teens and young adults with high-functioning autism and Asperger's Syndrome had considered themselves "losers," or aliens dropped on the wrong planet, until DIAGNOSING JEFFERSON came along. The theme of this book was strengthened by subsequent examination (not so in-depth as that with Jefferson) of a dozen other achievers in ASPERGER'S AND SELF-ESTEEM. How many creative people have turned toward a better path than one leading to dead-end despair because of these books? We may never know, but we do know that the works have had positive effects on many, into the thousands.
   
   Best-selling author Dr. Temple Grandin, whose comments are incorporated in this work, has said that "genius is an abnormality." That observation certainly jibes with what we know of Thomas Jefferson. His personal demeanor was odd, his mannerisms were odd, his choices and lifestyle were odd, and yet his reasoning and especially his writings were remarkable, brilliant, beyond anything known in his time or since. The handy add-on in DIAGNOSING JEFFERSON--examples of the astounding range of interests represented by Jefferson's writings--attests to something in the Sage of Monticello that is far outside contemporary observations and experience with any men and women of today.
   
   And because we know so little of quiet geniuses among us, as though they may have consigned themselves to anonymity lest their brilliance seem intimidating to the rest of us, this work has raised a few social considerations. Have we been treating the "developmentally disabled" as a second class, as we have done with women and with people of color or exotic national origins or unfamiliar religions? What do we gain by doing so, if not the feeding of our darker side, and more importantly, what do we lose?
   
   Some of this is addressed in the final chapter, in which the illustration has been used of the teenaged Jefferson's search for a proper educational environment. Similar searching has been recommended to meet the needs of today's creative young people who feel stuck in hostile social settings euphemistically referred to as "high schools." The parallel is apt--and astonishing for its coincidence and relevance.
   
   As one or two reviewers have correctly observed, a reader can learn as much about high-functioning autism from this book as he or she can learn about Thomas Jefferson. It is to be hoped that connection can be kept alive, to give stature to the so-called social misfits of today who (as currently suppressed geniuses among us) may show us a better way to manage Earth than use every resource for destroying the place and wiping out as many of its inhabitants as the whims of our "leaders" dictate.



5. I have read this book plenty of times. Lets face the facts: history, as Edward Baker Carr (the super-famous historian) pointed out, is a mixture or blend of objective facts organized in a subjective fashion. We look at history FROM THE PRESENT. My goal was, and still is, to be a PsyD in Clinical Psychology and support Autistics in society by issuing societal awareness and change. Changing the perceptions about the Autistic-frame of mind will take time. But at least Ledgin is doing something to initiate social change. This book take facts and arranges them into a logcial fashion. Ledgin is well supported in his claim, no doubt about it. He's right because it makes sense. We can see the recurring patterns in Jefferson's behavior and we can see it is influenced by natural(biological) over societal forces. It is excellent research and I admire this historical research as it is making progress toward the truth. Remember my review, someday I just might be as famous as Ledgin. LoL. Mr. John A. LaPaglia, B.A./B.A.

No comments about The Reagan Diaries: Library Edition.

2 comments about Hoover The Fishing President: Portrait of the Private Man and His Life Outdoors.

1. Not much of a book. Could be a research paper from which a Hoover biographer might lift anecdotes and background material. Unless the reader is an avid fish chaser much of this chronicle cannot be appreciated.



2. Wert has uncovered the complex , intriguing life of Herbert Hoover. Hoover's energy, verve, and even joie de vivre is revealed in anecdote after anecdote. While the book is a great fishing adventure, following Hoover from youth to old age on nearly every fishing outing he undertook, in the background is subtle political history and commentary that tells an enormous amount about Hoover's character and political savvy . Most interesting is the way we are shown the behind-the-scenes shenanigans of powerful political figures.
   
   The book is superbly researched and well annotated and illustrated. A great read.

5 comments about Lincoln and Whitman: Parallel lives in Civil War Washington.

1. Mark Daniel Epstein is an author of varied genres from history to poetry to novels. In this 2004 book he explores in a fairly short but succinct and well written account the parallel lives of two geniuses:
   Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865) and Walt Whitman (1819-1892).
   Whole libraries are devoted to the life of our 16th martyred president Abraham Lincoln. In this book, however, Epstein focuses on Lincoln's interest in literature and his yearly life in the White House. We see him picking up a copy of Whitman's "Leaves of Grass" in his dusty Illinois office in 1857. The book was in the possession of William Herndon Lincoln's literature loving partner in Springfield. We learn that Lincoln read few books but digested them well in his photographic memory brain. He loved Shakespeare, and was well versed in the King James Version of the Bible. Lincoln memorized poetry and had also written melancholic verses as he pondered the sad past and memories of home.
   Walt Whitman first saw Lincoln in New York as the president-elect was on his way to take the oath of office as chief executive in that dangerous March of 1861. Whitman left his New York home taking a series of job in wartime Washington. He often saw Lincoln and bowed to him as the burdened president rode to his retreat The Soldier's Home where he rested from his duties. Whitman and Lincoln never met though Whitman did see him close up on the White House in October, 1863. Whitman had been invited to the Executive Estate by his friend and Lincoln's private secretary John Hay. (Hay would later become the Secretary of State in the McKinley administration).
   Epstein delves into the homosexual liasons entered into by Whitman dubbed the "good gray poet." Whitman often visited wounded and dying soldiers in the many hospitals in the Washington area. Some of these soldiers became his lovers. Though he wrote his best lyrical poetry prior to the war, Whitman did publish "Drum-Taps" and new editions of "Leaves of Grass" during the time of the great rebellion. His most elegaic poem lamenting the loss of Lincoln who had been assassinated at Ford's Theatre was "While Lilacs in the Last Dooryard Bloomed". This poem and "O Captain my Captain" voice in poetry the deep grief Whitman experienced a the loss of a man he called "The Hoosier Michelangelo."
   The best and most poignant chapter is the last one in the book. In that chapter we see Whitman quoting poetry and memories of Lincoln with a glittering audience of admirers such as Mark Twain in a New York theatre in April 1878. Whitmans was an egotistical self-promoter but he was also a patriot who loved America and the martyred president.
   Epstein is himself a poet. He is expert in explaining the genius of Whitman;s poetry. He has recently published a new book "The Lincolns" examining the married life of Abraham and Mary Tood Lincoln. Epstein's fine work in literature and history are a potent combination. This book is a fine biography for lovers of American history, poetry and how life was lived in the mid Victorian and Civil War eras. Recommended.



2. The only problem I had with the book was the author's obsession with Whitman's so-called "personal" life. I can't say the H word since xena keeps deleting my comments, but take it from me, Walt was NOT what Epstein seems to think he was. When Carpenter and Wilde tried to corner him about it, he was absolutely AGHAST that anyone would do that, let alone think HE would ever be so depraved. Whitman was America's only conscious poet. Lincoln was America's only conscious president. You can't get there having a corrupt soul.



3. Daniel Mark Epstein succeeds at what seems simple, but in truth is a daunting task: combining the literary and the historical in a moving, evocative narrative. The book gracefully moves between and across the lives of Lincoln and Whitman, with a cathartic spirit uniting the stories of both men. Epstein makes no claims that the spiritual union was, in reality, anything more than a parallel, largely reliant on the troubled times (and Whitman's obsession...or coincidence). There is a somewhat amplified mysticism surrounding Lincoln and Whitman as "characters" in this historical narrative, but such characterization errs more often on the positive than it does otherwise. The parallels between the lives of both men are compelling, revealing, and informative, and the ending is truly poignant. Civil War Washington also comes alive with a mapmaker's eye and a storyteller's gift for detail. Wonderful!



4. Epstein hits the ground running in this extraordinary blend of dramatic storytelling and lit crit, and he never lets up until the final page. Everyone has always known that Whitman was influenced by Lincoln, but it has been a matter of heated controversy for many years as to whether Lincoln was or was not influenced by "Leaves of Grass." Epstein proves this beyond any reasonable doubt in the first thirty pages, as he introduces us into the gritty atmosphere of Lincoln's law office in the 1850s. He follows the two men to Washington, D.C. during the Civil War, and his capturing of their two characters and their struggles, as their paths cross and shadow one another during that intense period, is a literary and historical tour de force. One of my favorite books about the Civil War.
   
   Bernard Northrop
   Providence, R.I.



5. The PW reviewer might have been a little careless in political characterization, but I think that this book does soften Whitman's views, and muddle Lincoln's, to try to put them both in the same place. The analysis of the poetry might be fine, but the political analysis isn't. The portrait of Chase, and the descriptions of the "radical Republicans", is one-sided. Mary Todd Lincoln is bad and horrible, and somehow that is conflated with her sympathy for the slaves & for a war against slavery. (Whitman only had lovely relationships, apparently). Also, it is true that there are little irritating errors, the "relationship" between Howells & Whitman in 1860 being a clear one.

No comments about The Legacy of Andrew Jackson: Essays on Democracy, Indian Removal and Slavery (Walter Lynwood Fleming Lectures in Southern History).

2 comments about The Faith of America's Presidents.

1. What type of faith in God does it take to lead the United States of America? While every president of the United States is a "Christian?" How does their Christianity play out in the historical record and against the various central doctrines of orthodox Christianity? Daniel J. Mount has provided a remarkable effort in THE FAITH OF AMERICA'S PRESIDENTS.
   
   Starting with George Walker Bush, the reader learns detailed and documented background of each president and their faith. Each entry is thoroughly footnoted and documented.
   
   This book makes a lasting contribution to the historical record of American Presidents and I recommend it.



2. This is a book you really ought to have on your bookshelf. It was published in 2007, so the first president in the chapters that work their way backward in time is George W. Bush. The chapters are mostly short, ranging from three to over twenty pages, depending upon the president and his spiritual beliefs and his life experiences. There are extensive bibliographies at the close of each chapter as well.
   
   I found this book fascinating, and it is one that I will return to again and again. It's easy to pluck it off the shelf and read about just one man who led our nation (although most often reading one will lead to two and then three).

4 comments about Eleanor and Harry: The Correspondence of Eleanor Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman (Lisa Drew Books).

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



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

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




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

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




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

1 comments about The Religious Beliefs of Our Presidents: From Washington to F.D.R. (The Freethought Library).

1. very good. it has letters by clergy's and others who wrote about the beliefs of the presidents very interesting

5 comments about Eisenhower (Great General Series).

1. Of the four titles in Palgrave's Great Generals Series that I've now read (Patton, Bradley, MacArthur, and now Eisenhower), this is the worst. Wukovits, whose World War II writing has for the most part covered the Pacific, doesn't seem to have a strong background in the European theater, and it shows. The details are very basic; there's little, if anything, new here for anyone who has read a book or two on the ETO. Sure, an author can cover only so much in a book of less than 200 pages, but for the possibilities of a short biography, take a look at historian Richard B. Frank's insightful volume on MacArthur in this same series.



2. Though a nice and mostly complete overview of Ike's life until assuming the Presidency, the author does not hesitate to inject his own personal bias in a work that should be a review of historical records. When discussing military preparedness, he adds a comment about the supposedly underarmored HUMVEEs in Iraq. When discussing the identity of the enemy, he says that Eisenhower's job was somewhat easier than today, for the enemy was clearly identified, as opposed to today's "insurgents fighting for their country" and "religious zealots fighting for their freedom." He even manages to take a swipe at todays military, commenting on Abu Ghraib. In fact, by the time of the description of the Normandy invasion, there are at least 5 references to Iraq and Afghanistan. This type of editorializing in what should be a historic work goes far to undermine the objectivity of the author. One feels that he has an agenda, and is using this book to promote it.
   
   Tell us the story of Ike, leave your opinions on US policy today outside the dustjacket. Commentaries such as the ones I mentioned reduce the credibility of the author and make one question the rest of his work.



3. Interesting book. But Wesley Clarke -- who wrote the forward --is an airhead and a sychophant par excellence.



4. This should especially be a must read for students. The book is concise and to the point without a lot of extraneous words. Having just recently rented a film about Eisenhower at a local store, I'm shocked that the student-age employee neither knew who Eisenhower was or how to spell his name. Do we call this a dumbed-down nation?
   A good combination with this book would be to first have the students read it and then show the film Ike: A Countdown to D-Day which was a made-for-TV film starring Tom Selleck.
   More books of this ilk would help EDUCATE!



5. I just finished this book, and found it a very enjoyable read. I learned a number things about Eisenhower's earlier years that were new to me--for instance, I never knew he had served in Panama, or been offered more lucrative business opportunities, but had elected to stay in the army. or that because of his abilities as a staff officer he had been denied the chance to have his own command except for a very brief period.
   
   In terms of Eisenhower's WWII experiences, the focus is on getting into Eisenhower's thoughts and feelings and his relationships with other generals, particularly Patton and Montgomery, though the author also points out that Eisenhower tried to meet with all ranks of soldiers when time allowed. I was somewhat surprised that Eisenhower's alleged relationship with Kay Summersby is completely unmentioned, though the author does quote four times from her book.
   
   Also, this is not the book to go to if you want an operational description of the battles Eisenhower oversaw--even the situation on Omaha is covered in only a couple of sentences. Similarly for Market-Garden, but here the author states this operation should never have happened, one of his few (though here only implied) negative statements about Eisenhower.
   
   Eisenhower's life after the army and his presidency are briefly covered, with all the major events highlighted, but not discussed in detail.
   
   I strongly recommend this book for an introduction to Eisenhower.

5 comments about Woodrow Wilson (Penguin Lives).

1. In the annals of American history, few presidents have a more interesting story to tell than Woodrow Wilson. Despite this truth, Wilson's legacy has produced such a terrible collection of biographies. This book is a continuation of that standard of trampling the legacy of the greatest idealist to reside in the White House.
   
   While this book is intended to be a brief biography of Wilson, this characteristic would seem to cause more focus on landmarks in Wilson's life. This does not stop Louis Auchincloss from going off topic for pages at a time. The author repeatedly references Bill Clinton, whose most striking similarity is being a democrat. There also seems to be a lot of speculation on the part of the author, such as speculating that Wilson's childhood illnesses were psychosomatic (p. 7). Like the original source of this fact, he lacks tangible support for his agrument. It is nothing more than an educated guess. Just like the guess that Wilson suffered from dyslexia (p. 6). The chapters on World War I are clumsy because of the digressions. The better chapters focus on Wilson's first and second wives, as well as his years at Princeton.
   
   I initially thought the author loathed Woodrow Wilson, but softened in this stance as the book progressed. Still I wondered why one would write a book about a seemingly undesirable topic? Not that I expected much from this book, but I, like many readers of history, am still waiting for an outstanding biography on Woodrow Wilson.



2. Enjoyed the taped version of WOODROW WILSON by
   Louis Auchincloss . . . it is a brief account of our 28th President
   that gave me insight into how a professor and then college
   administrator could make the leap into politics . . . hearing it
   reminded me a bit the Classic Comics that I read when
   younger, in that much detail was left out . . . however, you
   got just enough information . . . I'd recommend this book
   by Auchincloss, especially for the fascinating tale it told
   of how when Wilson became sick, his wife practically ran the nation.



3. Of all the men who have tried to fill the shoes of Washington and Jefferson, who was the worst? Our current crop of "Hallmarxist" professors consider anyone who would assign Wilson and FDR to the lower depths as deserving a quick commitment with Ezra Pound into loony bin of St. Elizabeth's, and for anyone to hold Lincoln among the worst invites being regarded a simple crank. But Thomas DiLorenzo's _The Real Lincoln_ has finally exposed Old Abe as well worthy of infamy, and Jim Powell's _FDR's Folly_ has corrected the omission of Murray Rothbard's _America's Great Depression_ by exposing FDR as really nothing more than - pardon the pun - Hoover on wheels.
   
   This leaves only Wilson, the man whom Mencken denominated _Doctor Dulciferous_ for his cooing blovations. The lack of a good biography of Wilson that reveals him for what he was - our worst president - or at least a book as good as DiLorenzo's on Lincoln- is not remedied by Louis Auchincloss (hereafter LA).
   
   LA for the first 64 pages gets his facts roughly right and his conclusions quite wrong. For example:
   - LA calls Wilson's claims to being a Southerner "factitious". This is putting it mildly: Wilson in his heart was an utter New England barn burner and witch-hunter, oblivious to the positive achievements of Calvinism (Milton, Rembrandt, and the Jansenist Pascal) and a perfect specimen of non-conformism's worst faults: obstinacy, a cocksure belief in one's moral correctness, a deluded sense that he was the agent of the Almighty, and that his opponents were tools of the Devil.
   -- Wilson's view of blacks can only be called sheer racist, even in a time when "racist" has become a word of cultural socialist McCarthyism - yet LA offers the lame excuse that everyone else from his background thought the same.
   - LA faults Wilson for appointing an Anglophile to the Court of St. James, yet LA's own facts prove Wilson the most Anglophilic of all. He tried to remake Princeton into the image of Oxford and Cambridge. He wanted American government to resemble Westminster, knowing full well that in Britain today the Prime Minister is a dictator, free of any checks. Wilson wanted the same for the President in a manner that would make even a Gaullist blush. Indeed, one of Wilson's many bad legacies is a chief executive out of control. Mencken was right to observe that the US State Dept. was simply an antechamber to the Foreign Office in Whitehall.
   - LA mentions Wilson's stokes, one after another it seems, and tries to blame them, wrongly, for his manifold shortcomings. In fact, I have yet to see in print what seems quite possible: That Wilson - and for that matter Theodore Roosevelt - were really unhinged.
   
   Wilson's 2nd worst foreign policy blunder was his treatment of Latin Americas - a treatment inept when it wasn't contemptible. LA tries to make Bryan the fall guy for Wilson's folly, and considers the Villa fiasco as "necessitated". I pray the Mexicans now flooding into the country have short memories. When it comes to economics, LA really shows himself wanting. He considers the Federal Reserve Act a "great success", giving us an "elastic currency", when in fact the fiscal solvency of the US -- relatively sound after Hamilton's schemes were put down and prior to Wilson - has been a shambles ever since. Need proof? Check the inflation monitor at the Commerce Dept website and see what a dollar in 1950 is worth now. And thank Woodrow Wilson. Desperate for something good to say about Wilson's domestic turn at the helm, LA chooses his tariff reduction - only on the same page to state, rightly, that the taxpayer was now to be equally robbed by the new Federal Income Tax (also a Wilson deed), that tariff reform was aborted by the Great War, and that it was repealed in 1922.
   
   LA never mentions Wilson's lasting effect on domestic US politics: Completing the work of Lincoln in the destruction of the Jeffersonian party in the US (I'm grateful to Thomas Dilorenzo and Clyde Wilson for this insight). Prior to Wilson, we had such a party, the Democrat Party - with support for minimal government, subsidiarily, states' rights, low tariffs, originalist construction of the Constitution, Anglophobia, gold standard (at least until Bryan), staying out of European affairs, and a healthy suspicion of banks. Wilson turned this party into a socialist party. In fact, now we really only have the choice between two socialist parties: The Hamiltonian version of the Republicans, and the 100 proof offered by the Dimmycrats.
   
   After page 64, LA offers a complete whitewash. Wilson's utter disaster - still visited upon all of us, and re-uttered in the inaugural addresses of Kennedy I and Bush II - was, or course, his entry into World War I, with all the suffering that this decision caused. LA can only find sympathy for Wilson's views, and wastes a whole chapter of this short book demonizing Lodge. I am reminded by the estimable Clyde Wilson (no relation, certainly!) that Woodrow Wilson was our only Ph. D. president. LA offers nothing better than the socialist and PHuddy-Duddy camorra presiding in our Potemkin universities
   
   So, as we wait for a good biography, anyone who really wants to know the truth of the Old Fool should save his money and buy instead Jim Powell, _Wilson's War_, and Thomas Fleming, _The Illusion of Victory_.
   
   Two stars for being mercifully brief with readable prose.



4. This is a reasonable brief introduction to the career of Woodrow Wilson. His upbringing and early academic career are disposed of in short order in the first chapter. Then one chapter deals with his presidency of Princeton, one deals with (or covers the same time period as) his governorship of New Jersey, and the remaining seven cover his Presidency, all in an engaging and chatty style.

   The book's strongest point is describing what happened, although even here there are some strange omissions. It mentions his break with Hibben in Princeton without describing the circumstances, noting that Hibben went on to succeed Wilson as President of the university, or exploring the parallels with his later breaks with House and Tumulty. All of this could have been covered in a single paragraph. In addition, there is no mention of the country's Caribbean adventures in 1915; none of the Red Scare of 1919; and, probably worst of all, nothing about the Sedition Acts and the imprisonment of Eugene Debs, and no discussion of why America behaved worse towards its own citizens during and after the war than either Britain or France did. The first time the book mentions the League of Nations, it doesn't clearly describe what its purpose was (and it would have been nice if it had mentioned that it was actually the idea of the British Foreign Secretary, not Wilson). Still, as an overview of the events of Wilson's life it hits most of the main points.

   The book has less to offer on why things happened. In trying to explain why Colonel Harvey picked Wilson for Governor of New Jersey, it gives two pages on what Harvey got wrong about Wilson, but nothing on what he got right. It also takes at face value the idea that Wilson was offered the governorship "without ... even lifting a hand". It describes Wilson's feeling of betrayal by House when he returned to Paris in March 1919, but not what House had actually done!

   As noted by another reviewer, the book also fails to put Wilson's international achievements in a broader context. His aim of a just, lasing peace with Germany failed; his aim of encouraging self-determination among smaller nations succeeded, and he is still looked on as a hero in many smaller nations of Europe. Some more insight and context, and a more detailed assessment of his legacy, would have been welcome.

   Woodrow Wilson was a fascinating and controversial President. This book helps explain -- and to an extent shares -- the fascination, but it doesn't do enough to help the reader assess the controversies. Still, it's an reasonable starting point for people who know little about Wilson.

   One final comment: I'd also have been interested to know how the author is related to the Gordon Auchincloss who attended the Versailles conference -- it's not that common a name, after all.




5. If you don't know much more about Woodrow Wilson than an overview of the important events of his life, this book isn't going to help much. There's very little political analysis, almost no attempt to portray what diffiulties Wilson needed to overcome, and no passion at all in the writing. Actually this book feels a lot like a high school term paper that someone knew they had to write and just wanted to turn in for a passing grade. Auchincloss talks a bit about the two Wilsons (one good one bad) and hints at Wilson's dependance on women, but neither of these positions is fleshed out or used consistently. Maybe Woodrow Wilson's life is just too large for a book this small.