No comments about Jefferson: A Monticello Sampler.

No comments about The Complete Illustrated Guide to the Presidents of America: An authoritative history of the American presidency, shown in 500 colour photographs and illustrations (The Complete Illustrated Guide to).

5 comments about George Herbert Walker Bush: A Penguin Life (Penguin Lives).

1. Well, I think Wicker is a little down on our 41st President. Wicker describes Bush Senior as the person that would do anything to get elected. He also states that Bush had few convictions or beliefs. I will echo what previous reviewers have already said, journalism is sometimes not good history. My own opinion is that Bush Senior was probably a better President than the two men who followed him. However, historians will determine that and not some skeptical New York journalist.
   
   The summary history of George H. W. Bush was nice but brief (excepting the critical remarks). The reader will get an overview history of Bush Senior in this book.



2. I always consider George Herbert Walker Bush the original President Bush, but I prefer to think of him as a person with a clandestine history that has been hidden on a more ominous level, as a prime character, along with Jack Ruby, James Jesus Angleton, E. Howard Hunt, and David Atlee Phillips in PLAUSIBLE DENIAL by Mark Lane, an investigation of the question: Was the CIA involved in the assassination of JFK? In the case of the original President Bush, the success of some of his children is the most obvious evidence that America is currently being ruled by children of the people who killed President Kennedy. Tom Wicker is not so outrageously opposed to the undercover aspects of modern despicabilities, but he is capable of considering plenty of deep doo-doo on the question of whether the original George Bush was a wimp, as implied by the cover of the October 11, 1987 `Newsweek' which is quoted as saying, "George Bush: Fighting the Wimp Image." (p. 86). There is no index for the Penguin Life series book, GEORGE HERBERT WALKER BUSH by Tom Wicker, but source notes on pages 221-228 reveal books with many details to support Wicker's observations.
   
   Not everyone in America has been paying close attention to the personality factors that are deemed important in modern politics. With a majority of the voting citizens being capable of putting anyone they choose into the presidency, and people they hardly know into every other position, intellectuals are in an absurd position of trying to find ideas that correspond to events which are much too complex to conform to easy explanations. Huge amounts of money, a trillion here, a trillion there, are still considered significant in trying to frame political arguments, but few people can articulate any basis for expecting such huge amounts of money to materialize. In the case of the Bush family, much of their wealth followed the formation of Zapata Petroleum, which paid $850,000 to lease land in Coke County, Texas, resulting in seventy-one oil wells pumping more than a thousand barrels of oil a day by the end of 1953. (p. 12). Bush had enough money to join a partnership that opened the Commercial Bank and Trust Company. In 1958 Bush became president of Zapata Offshore and went into undersea drilling. (pp. 12-13).
   
   Tom Wicker hardly appreciates the satisfaction which becomes a part of the life of those people who are where the smart money is and who expect politics to be a continuation of social structures in which they have been successful. But most people don't measure up to the high standards of Skull and Bones, the CIA, or American foreign policy as conducted from the Oval Office. Tom Wicker has a depth of intellectual background which relies mainly on skepticism about policy assertions to arrive at behind-the-scenes explanations. A few things became public in instant headlines, such as Barbara Bush saying, "that four million dollar ----- I can't say it but it rhymes with rich" (p. 672) in 1984 when "Bush resented the fact that reporters then began to search his tax records," (p. 71). Wicker reports that the Mondale-Ferraro ticket lost by an electoral count of 525 to 13, without repeating the `Where's the beef?' line harped on by Walter Mondale, who was sure tax increases would be needed to avoid trillions of national debt now partly funded by baby boomer Social Security contributions that are considered worthless i.o.u.s in the Oval Office.
   
   On the ragged edges of GEORGE HERBERT WALKER BUSH, there is little doubt that competent people can engage in meritorious service to a common cause. Bush was brilliant as chairman of the Republican National Committee who showed up at a cabinet meeting on August 6, 1974 and "Nixon did not call on him, but Bush spoke up anyway. Watergate was the vital question, he said; it was sapping public confidence in the president, the party, the economy, the country as a whole. Therefore Nixon should resign, the party chairman told the president to his face--while the cabinet and others present sat in shocked silence." (p. 35). People listening to tapes could hear Nixon agreeing to `Bob Haldeman's cover-up plan for the FBI to stay out of a supposed "national security" incident.' (Note, p. 34). Senators like Barry Goldwater realized that Nixon could lose an impeachment battle on August 6, so Bush was capable of stating an obvious conclusion precisely when it needed to be acknowledged. Opinions among those who have been sampling deep doo-doo recently now differ mainly on what form the next disgrace to preside in the Oval Office will turn out to be.



3. I found this book to be a mere thumbnail sketch of Bush's long service to America, and I found its tone insulting. Wicker constantly derides Bush for his geniality, his many friendships, and for his constant `thank you' notes. I guess the brusque Nixon to Wicker is `one of us', while the polite Bush isn't. Doesn't that say more about Wicker than it does about Bush?
   
   Though Bush was a World War II veteran, a Congressman, a Senate nominee, Ambassador to the United Nations, Envoy to China, GOP Chairman, Director of the CIA, Vice President and President, Wicker seems to think that Bush was merely all `resume', and because he was so `nice' he was easy to lift, with his successes merely a result of the patronage of the powerful (mainly presidents.) What Wicker fails to understand is that Bush was appointed to those positions of power prior to the presidency because he is a man of intelligence and skill capable to preside over entire organizations with style and class.
   
   Wicker grudgingly gives some credit to Bush for his leadership during the Gulf War, but not nearly enough. And Bush's expertise in foreign policy is dismissed by Wicker, who thinks that Bush merely stood back and allowed events to occur, thus giving a sense of `calm'. (Anyone seeking a real understanding of Bush's contribution to foreign policy should read the book he co-authored with Brent Scowcroft, `A World Transformed.)
   
   In conclusion, I don't recommend this book at all. I could have put up with the condescension if it at least provided some sort of depth, but this book is unbelievably shallow.



4. Once again Tom Wicker has made American history accessible. In 219 pages of easy reading he has given us the essential George H. W. Bush. As a Democrat, I deem Wicker to completely fair. His major points are that Bush I's historical reputation rests on the decisions he made regarding the Gulf War. Even those who believe sanctions against Saddam should have given more time, will have to admit that the President may well have been right. Historically, his decision may have been the equivalent of the French kicking Hitler out of the demilitarized Rhineland in 1936 and avoiding WWII. However, Wicker has plenty of fodder for those of us who generally do not admire Bush I and Bush II. This includes the constant attack on opponents on phony issues rather than relying on their own merits. Wicker also takes us through the less laudible moments in Bush's career: kicking Geraldine Ferraro's ass in 1984; his cynical appointment of Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court; his selection of Dan Quayle as VP, dropping bombs on Panamanian civilians for no good reason and Iran-Contra.



5. Wicker does a good job of concisely giving you Bush's early political life, his successful House campaigns, his unsuccessful Senate campaigns and what not. He also gives a decent description of Bush's role as ambassador, CIA director and chairman of the RNC in the 1970s. All through the era, Wicker paints Bush as a good soldier for the Republicans, and he comes off as an honorable man.

   But once Bush becomes Vice President, Wicker is disappointed in him. Wicker sees Bush as a sell-out of his moderate Republican leanings for the red meat Reagan policies. He compares Bush to a chameleon that changes his colors to blend into the current campaign strategy. On top of that, Wicker contends that Bush could easily change political stripes because he lacked vision and purpose.

   Okay, Bush lacked vision, but Wicker doesn't seem to value vision at all when it came from Ronald Reagan. In fact, in the middle of a biography of Bush, Wicker deems it necessary to tell us that Reagan's vision of a Soviet Free Europe had absolutely no role in bringing down that superpower. He's just got to tell us that Gorby saved the world not Reagan. That Gorby's goal was the opposite of Reagan's doesn't mean anything to this objective journalist. Does that mean that Gorby lacked vision too? Didn't that genius understand that people would be better off out from under his iron boot? Come to think of it, maybe Hitler would have fallen apart too if we'd just given him a chance. History is just replete with examples of totalitarian governments that renounce themselves and become free without outside agitation.

   That's the main problem with Wicker's book. It's less a biography of Bush than a step by step criticism of Republican ideology and its failings. How dare a Republican administration treat Saddam Hussein nicely when he was beating up on the hated Iranians. Surely they knew 10 years in advance that he would invade Kuwait and we'd have to go to war with him.

   Bush certainly lacked vision compared to Ronald Reagan. But after 8 years of Clinton, a person can sure grow found of decency, loyalty and personal honor. Wicker says as much during the last paragraph of the book. His conclusion is that Bush may have been a mess, but at least he was a brave guy who won the Gulf War. It was almost like the Penguin editors added that at the end so as not to upset Bush enthusiasts.

   Every public figure should have positive and negative books written about him/her in order for students of history to get a wide picture. Books are part of the great debate. The trouble with this book is that it's not a good place for conjecture over substance. In a 200 page Penguin Lives' book, I would like to have an outline of the guy's life not a political fight. Wicker could have easily written a larger biography of Bush somewhere else and told us what a numbskull he was. It seems out of place in this series. Am I going to suffer this again if I read Penguin's books on Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther?

1 comments about James Polk and The Expansionist Impulse (Library of American Biography Series) (3rd Edition) (Library of American Biography).

1. Between the end of Andrew Jackson's presidency in 1837 and the beginning of Abraham Lincoln's in 1861 there was a 24 year period of presidential mediocrity. Eight presidents served during this era, four of them for less than a single term, forming a roster of forgettable names: Martin Van Buren, William Henry Harrison, John Tyler, Zachary Taylor, Millard Fillmore, Franklin Pierce and James Buchanan. Only one man in this era of mediocrity stands out at all: James Polk.
   
   What makes Polk stand out from these others is that he actually accomplished something noteworthy. During his presidency, the U.S. warred with Mexico. This war was significant not only because it marked the first time the U.S. fought a war in foreign territory, but more importantly, it resulted in the U.S. acquiring a vast amount of land, including California and New Mexico (it also forced Mexico to recognize that Texas was now part of its northern neighbor). In addition, Polk was able to more peacefully obtain what would become Oregon and Washington from England.
   
   The acquisition of Mexican land was controversial during the war and even remains the source of argument today. Long before the controversies of weapons of mass destruction, there were the debatable origins of the Mexican War; Polk was determined to acquire land and set up things to force a conflict. Besides the somewhat dubious origins of the war, the result for the U.S. was also filled with negatives; the new territories would exacerbate North-South conflicts (particularly about slavery) and - though temporarily alleviated by the Compromise of 1850, would eventually lead to the Civil War.
   
   Sam Haynes has written an excellent if brief biography of Polk. In just over 200 pages, he reviews Polk's entire life, focusing on his one term as president. Haynes remains reasonably objective, with as much praise for Polk's better qualities as criticism for his deficiencies. If you are interested in Polk or this era of American History, this is a good introduction.

1 comments about Lou Henry Hoover: Activist First Lady (Modern First Ladies).

1. Since her husband is now permanently associated with the Great Depression, and subsequently banished to history's 'bad presidents' list, Nancy Beck Young's book accomplishes a formidable task: encouraging readers to find something positive about the Hoovers, especially Lou Henry.
   
   Flouting her generation's ideas about what a woman (especially a 'public' woman) loved or did, Lou Henry Hoover was involved with the outdoors, particularly the Girl Scouts. Although this participation does not seem very revolutionary today, it was remarkable for a woman who had grown up when women running around in the outdoors actually was considered a very scandalous activity.
   
   Although she did not have her own radio show or chair a presidential task force, Lou Henry Hoover was a revolutionary force in her own right.
   
   Mrs. Hoover similarly became engaged with private-sector relief efforts which attempted to end the Great Depression, but these proved much less successful than her other projects. Like her husband, Mrs. Hoover could not realize that the private sector lacked the resources to salvage a decimated economy, the same government which printed the nation's money supply would have to step in.
   
   Clearly empathetic towards her subject, Young is also objective enough to avoid romanticizing the Hoover's strong free-market economic beliefs. Her scholarship adds a complexity to both the Hoovers and an understanding of the first lady's constantly evolving role.
   
   A relatively 'traditional' public demeanor ultimately enabled Mrs. Hoover to begin a transition of the "First Lady" role AND "American Womanhood" which her successors are only continuing.

1 comments about Grace Coolidge: The People's Lady in Silent Cal's White House (Modern First Ladies).

1. Robert Ferrell has given us a sweepingly short biography of First Lady Grace Coolidge, but without any real new information. He mentions Dr. Joel Boone's papers in his "bibliographic essay," but fails to show how he used them in any extensive way, except to continually mention that Grace confided her feelings privately to him....where are the examples?...and why are sources not cited?
   
   He makes many brief teasing references to Grace and Calvin's marital difficulties, but nothing in detail; omitting anything new and substantive about the President's relationship with his older son John. Ferrell's research on the death of Calvin, Jr. and its effect on the family is very thin.
   
   In touching on the Harding scandals during the Coolidge presidency, Ferrell attempts to, as in other books he has written, rehabilitate Harding's' reputation by refuting what is now fact: that Harding had affairs with Nan Britton and Carrie Phillips, even though these are but two of many, and are well documented.
   
   A charming book, but don't look for anything new here. His badly documented "bibliographic essay" takes pot-shots at other authors, and makes several statements that much of the material and papers available are "uninteresting." I could say the same for this book. One would hope that another historian who knows how to do serious research will step up to the plate and produce something with more substance and stop complaining about what is not available, as he does with every set of papers listed in his "bibliographic essay."

No comments about Thabo Mbeki & The Battle For The Soul Of The Anc.

3 comments about The Juggler.

1. Chapter one of this splendid book begins with this incredibly revealing remark that FDR made on May 15, 1942:
   
   "You know I am a juggler, and I never let my right hand know what my left hand does.... I may have one policy for Europe and one diametrically opposite for North and South America. I may be entirely inconsistent, and furthermore I am perfectly willing to mislead and tell untruths if it will help win the war."
   
   Franklin Roosevelt was a very charming man. He was so agreeable to so many different people and interests. But as one historian put it, behind that charming mask was a cunning mind. FDR had the perfect temperament to direct World War II foreign operations. It may not have always been obvious what he was up to, but look at the results he achieved.
   
   Another historian titled his FDR biography "The Lion and the Fox." Another historian compared FDR's sly foreign policy to that of looking into a kaleidoscope. You cannot see how the patterns are forming... unless you take apart the kaleidoscope and see its hidden methods.
   
   This brief book takes apart the kaleidoscope. It was written by Warren Kimbell, one of the greatest foreign policy historians of the World War II era, after a long and distinguished academic career. He was the editor of the correspondenses between Winston Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt.
   
   The text itself is brief - only 200 pages. The writing is interesting and concise. The footnotes are extensive - 77 pages - and loaded with useful tidbits. The book mentions the interpretations of several different foreign policy experts and highlights the most credible.
   
   The book uses fourteen chapters to describe Roosevelt's strategies in several different arenas. For example, one focuses on Lend-Lease. Another focuses on Casablanca. Another part mentions FDR's ant-colonialism viewpoint. Another details FDR's vision for a safer, more secure post-war world.
   
   Kimball describes Roosevelt's foreign policy as "Americanism," which was a profound change from America's role in the world before FDR came to power. Read this book to find out what he means.



2. In The Juggler, Warren Kimball attempts to paint a new picture of FDR�s foreign policy. Warren Kimball�s thesis is that FDR had a vision for his foreign policy and did not merely react to events but attempted to craft a post-World War II world. From Lend-Lease to World War II, Kimball argues that FDR was consistent in his beliefs and desires. As a politician, FDR (unlike President Wilson) was willing to compromise to ensure his dream would come to pass.
   
   The tragedy was the FDR�s vision was beyond humanity. Like Communism, he thought that the utopian ideal would allow humanity to transcend our weaknesses. War would no longer be profitable so nobody would want to wage it. This vision went beyond his grasp to attain. He did succeed (whether it was he doing or merely the geopolitical realities of the Russian threat) in ensuring that the UN would be founded and that the US would continue its presence in world affairs.
   
   Warren Kimball wrote an important book to dispel the preconceptions of FDR�s foreign policy. Despite contradictions and vague notions, FDR did have a larger vision and didn�t spent his Presidency merely reacting to foreign events.



3. An outstanding contribution to World War Two diplomatic history, Warren Kimball lays to rest one of the old chestnuts common to most people - that Franklin D. Roosevelt, the domestic reformer, had no consistent foreign policy, merely reacting to events. Weaving humour, deft insight, an unparalleled knowledge of the sources (Mr. Kimball is the editor of the FDR-Churchill correspondence) and diplomatic history together wonderfully, the Juggler is one of the central texts for anyone looking at the wartime Grand Alliance.

2 comments about Lincoln's Quest for Union.

1. Excellent, enjoyable book. Focuses mostly on psychology, but has lots of references if you want more historical detail.



2. This book is a wonder insight into the psyche of Abraham Lincoln. This book focuses on the history of Lincoln, not so much the history of his political terms as president, rather the history behind the morals and personality of the man himself. Charles Strozier does a wonderful job in piecing together the facts and fables in order to tell the tale of Lincoln. There are so many folk tales on Lincoln that it can be hard to figure out what really happened and what didn't. There are myriad sources used in order to give this book the depth needed to paint a lush illustration of such an interesting person.
   
   Abraham Lincoln is easily connected to the American Civil War. However in this book, not much of the war is really mentioned. Nor are detailed aspects of his political policies. The book traces the lifeline of Lincoln as child all the way to his death. Many psychological depictions are utilized in understanding the soul, mind, emotion and motivation behind the spirit of Abe Lincoln. I found it very interesting and satisfying to have such a blend of history and psychology, which is a wonderful way to do a case study on a person.

5 comments about Lincoln.

1. This first paragraph below has been used previously to introduce author Gore Vidal's' output of other interesting historical novels (that, however, unlike many such efforts in this genre when necessary hew pretty close to the historical record- hence their value).
   
   Listen up! As a general proposition I like my history straight up- facts, footnotes and all. There is enough work just keeping up with that work so that historical novels don't generally get a lot of my attention. In this space I have reviewed some works of the old American Stalinist Howard Fast around the American Revolution and the ex-Communist International official and Trotsky biographer Victor Serge about Stalinist times in the Russia of the 1930's, but not much else. However, one of the purposes of this space is to acquaint the new generation with a sense of history and an ability to draw some lessons from that history, if possible. That is particularly true for American history- the main arena that we have to glean some progressive ideas from. Thus an occasional foray, using the historical novel in order to get a sense of the times, is warranted. Frankly, there are few better at this craft that the old bourgeois historical novelist, Norman Mailer nemesis and social commentator Gore Vidal. Although his politics are somewhere back in the Camelot/FDR period he has a very good ear for the foibles of the American experience- read him with that caveat in mind.
   
   Vidal, as is his format in this series of expositions on the American experience, combines fictional characters and situations with the makings and doings of real characters and events in American history, here the hard Civil War days of decision of the Lincoln administration. Here the narrator is actually a real character from that history, John Hay, one of Lincoln's two personal secretaries who later became Secretary of State in the Republican McKinley administration near the end of the 19th century (and who appears in a the later Vidal novel Empire in that very different role). The virtue of this selection of Hay as the narrator is that one is given a bird's eye view of the daily goings on (fictional or not) at the Lincoln White House and a very chose vantage point to observe the kind of things that weighted heavily on Lincoln's mind and on his agenda for preserving the Union.
   
   Interestingly, although the Lincoln persona has been viewed from every possible perspective and from every possible political view by now Vidal has contributes a very fast moving rendition of the story with his little twist. His central premise, one shared by the historian Doris Kearns Goodwin in her fairly recent book on Lincoln and his Cabinet, is that only a sage and driven personality like Lincoln's could have held all the diverse and generally antagonistic personalities on the coalition that he put together among pro-Unionist forces in order to save the Republic. His feigns and thrusts in all directions, seemingly after much agonizing reflection keeps one on one's toes as one turns the pages every though the outcome is known. Certainly the main alternate contenders for power (that 1864 Republican nomination was always lurking in the background) Secretary of State Seward and Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. Chase evidently did not have that capacity and in the end seemingly reconciled themselves, in Chase's case kicking and screaming with daughter Kate in tow, to that secondary role (Chase got bought off by the Supreme Court Chief Justiceship).
   
   Vidal wrote this novel in the early 1980's at a time that I was reading Carl Sandburg's volumes of biography on Lincoln. If I am not mistaken Vidal owns some debt of gratitude to the Chicago poet for the musical sense of his novel. Many of the little scenarios, such as the incessant clamor for jobs from every Tom, Dick and Harry who might have voted for Lincoln in 1860 that filled the time of Hay (and Nicolay, the other Lincoln secretary) and that make this novel so compelling I remember from reading Sandburg's Lincoln biography. Also the treatment of Lincoln's homespun humor and proverbial storytelling powers (always with some political point on the edge of the blade). As well as Lincoln's reactions to his household tragedies and the massive tragedies unfolding on the battlefields.
   
   Finally, for those who like their history in capsule form, with a sweetener if you will, this is a very good place to begin your Lincoln or Civil War studies. In quick succession you will learn about the tribulations of physically getting Lincoln inaugurated, the first reactions from the South to that fact by the various acts of secession, the South Carolina incidents culminating in the siege and capture of Fort Sumtner, the fact of two nation states existing where one had been previously as far as foreign recognition, particularly British and French recognition, was concerned.
   
   From there the military problems on the union beginning with Manassas and the question of competent leadership, Lincoln's frustrations with a series of military commanders, the stalemate on the battlefield. And overriding all that the struggle to determine the nature of the conflict- solely for the preservation of the Union or that and the abolition of slavery, the decisive battles of Vicksburg and Gettysburg and the change in concept to "total war" with the accession of Grand and McClellan to military leadership, military victory and then assassination of Lincoln. And along the way enough political intrigue, maneuvering, cowardice and heroics by some well-known historical characters to write many novels. But that is for another day. Read this today.



2. I'd like to give this book 5 stars for the extraordinary undertaking of thought and research that it represents, but the book, while very good, is weakened by its ambition and its reliance on dialog.
   
   I think Vidal developed insight into many of the players (Lincoln, Mary, Salmon Chase, Kate Chase, Sprague, Stanton, Seward, David, Hay...) and wanted to sketch a portrait of each one of them. This detracted from his most interesting portrait, that of Lincoln.
   
   The characters are developed primarliy through conversation, so much that it reads more like a script than a novel. Even as a script, it's in need of an edit. Some of the conversation has tremendous impact, such as Lincoln at cabinet meetings, exchanges with Mary, meeting with free Blacks, Lincoln on his own political situation, Mary talking with relatives, David and Booth, and Hay in Paris. At other times, the dialog seems to be there because it's just too clever to leave out.
   
   I recently read and thoroughly enjoyed Vidal's Burr: A Novel. The novel was enriched by my having recently read Alexander Hamilton and Fallen Founder: The Life of Aaron Burr. While I enjoyed and appreciated this book, perhaps it would have been more so had I prepared by reading something like Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln in advance.



3. Gore Vidal's 'Lincoln' immerses the reader in Civil War Washington with rich detail. Vidal introduces few fictional characters and hews close to the known historical record in brilliantly recreating actions and conversations. Lincoln emerges as a master political strategist who invites his chief adversaries into his Administration and then lulls them into thinking they and not he are the real powers. By the time Lincoln acheives near complete power, Chase and Seward are unsure just how it happened.
   
   By the end, this reader more pitied than despised Mary Todd Lincoln, but felt both emotions in full towards Lincoln's vicious and insane wife. Salmon Chase comes in for a richly deserved measure of disrepute with his incessant political ambitions. Lesser known characters such William Sprague and 'Chevalier' Henry Wikoff add color and dishonor. The examination of Lincoln's second secretary, John Hay, is fascinating and enlightening.
   
   Vidal inserts several rebels into the story, including a glory-hound named David Herold. These characters are real, but little is known about them and it shows. A reduced role for these characters would have mercifully shortened the extraordinary length of the book.
   
   Vidal controversially has Lincoln continuing to advocate the colonization of freed slaves right up until the day of his assassination. My understanding of the generally accepted view is that Lincoln had long since abadnoned colonization as a viable policy.
   
   Vidal's 'Lincoln' is historical fiction at its finest - entertaining and elucidating. Highly recommended.



4. Mr. Vidal has written an elegant story about one of the most troubling times in our nations history. As seen through the eyes of our greatest president, his cabinet and the people around him this book pulls you in and grabs you by the coattails. What is actual fact and what comes from Mr Vidals imagination? Every action, every word seems authentic and keeping in line with what we expect from the characters. A beautiful book, you feel as if you are right there seeing for yourself firsthand, the birth of a nation from grandiose ideas about democracy and union to a reality.



5. It is a book about Lincoln; the book was delivered on time and it was clean and just what we needed!