1 comments about Lincoln in the Times: The Life of Abraham Lincoln, as Originally Reported in The New York Times.

1. Two of the best of Lincoln's men, David Herbert Donald and Harold Holzer, have edited a book every person interested in Abraham Lincoln and/or newspaper coverage in the Civil War era should own.
   
   While a solid effort throughout, I found the second half of this book the most interesting. The reports printed in the New York Times on the last days of the war through the assassination conspiracy and its aftermath have a striking immediacy.
   
   The report carried in the Times on Walt Whitman's talk on Lincoln given in New York City, some twenty-two years after that dreadful day of April 14, is an especially fine close to a valuable book on our nation's greatest president.

5 comments about James K. Polk and the Expansionist Impulse (2nd Edition) (Library of American Biography).

1. This book is simple, not scholarly. If you are looking for a seminal work on James K. Polk, look elsewhere. On the other hand, if you are looking for an easy read to familiarize yourself with his life and presidency, this is kind of like the spark notes version.



2. 11 James K. Polk - 1845-49
   Polk is our most underrated president. He championed the idea of manifest destiny. He believed the United States was destined to own all the land from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Texas was annexed, and the Mexican War was fought. The treaty added California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Wyoming, Idaho, Oregon and Washington. The U.S. stretched from sea to shining sea. Polk was from Tennessee. He accomplished what he wanted and decided not to seek a second term. I rank him #6.



3. James K. Polk has one of the most interesting historical reputations among American presidents. Serving for a solitary term, he consistently ranks among the most highly regarded occupants of the White House. Yet in spite of this he has been the subject of surprisingly little attention from historians. This is what makes Sam Haynes' short study so welcome. Seeing Polk as representative of the nation's desire for territorial expansion, he provides a concise account of the life of this understudied figure.
   
   Haynes' book is hardly the final word on Polk; he compresses the first thirty years of Polk's life into a single chapter, raising many questions that are then left unanswered. It is only when Polk emerges as one of Andrew Jackson's lieutenants in the House of Representatives that the narrative slows enough to allow for insights. Haynes sees Polk as the "consummate Jacksonian," serving as a loyal lieutenant and emerging as one of the foremost heirs to his legacy. Yet two successive defeats in races for the governorship of Tennessee dimmed his political star, and his name was not among those of the frontrunners for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1844.
   
   Nonetheless, Polk emerged from a deadlocked convention as the first "dark horse" nominee in American history. Hynes argues that the significance of the 1844 presidential convention lies in the embrace of territorial expansion as an issue that united a broad range of groups in a diverse country, which helped Polk defeat Henry Clay in the subsequent election. As president, Polk was a hands-on manager who carefully monitored every department of the executive branch. While viable with the small bureaucracy in the Washington of his day, this proved impractical when managing the far-flung war against Mexico.
   
   The Mexican-American War takes up over a third of the book, both as the pivotal event of Polk's presidency and as the culminating moment of the expansionist movement. Haynes depicts it as a natural consequence of the belligerency of American expansion, which risked war with Great Britain as well over the Pacific Northwest. Polk's battles were not confined to foreign relations, though, as going to war with poorly defined aims exacerbated tensions between the proslavery South and antislavery North. Polk also clashed with the predominantly Whig military commanders, who chafed at the president's effort to micromanage the conflict. This created conflict as well with Polk's handpicked negotiator, Nicholas Trist, who succeeded in hammering out a treaty ending the war before the expected recall order arrived. His success allowed the president to step down with the war as the crowning achievement of his administration, though Polk was so exhausted that he died soon afterwards.
   
   Haynes's book provides an excellent introduction to both American expansionism during the 1840s and Polk's conduct of the war. In many respects, it serves as a useful supplement to Charles Sellers's unfinished two-volume study of Polk, James K. Polk, Jackonian 1795-1843 & Continentalist 1843-1846 (Two Volume Set), which covers his life to the start of the war with Mexico. Yet while Sellers's biography is the definitive work on the president's early years, this book is still the best modern study available of Polk's complete political career.



4. A short book written more as text book that about the life of Polk. I was disappointed with the book. We need more about James K. Polk.



5. James K. Polk and the Expansionist Impulse is an exciting and educational book. It helps to understand American history especially the policies pursued between 1845 and 1849 as well as the polities of that time but more importantly it enlightens the reader on the life of American's 11th president who added 522 million acres to land of the country. The book also confirmed the accusation that Americans think they are superior and have the ability to do anything at all better than the rest of the world. This is evident in the way Mexico was treated. Convinced that they were the only people with the requisite qualities for self-government, they looked down on the Mexicans and took away their lands. One can now perfectly understands why Mexicans harbor so much bitterness towards Americans even up to today. This book will be of a great benefit to any student studying American history and anyone at all who is interested in learning about President Polk and the lands he coveted for his country.

5 comments about Old Hickory's War: Andrew Jackson and the Quest for Empire.

1. This is a well-researched book on AJ and his Indian Wars leading up to and including the Battle of New Orleans. Not much detail as far as military operations. It should be noted that the author's are coming at this subject from a strongly anti-Jackson bias, which some times is overstated.



2. This easily readable, complete account of the origins of the Southeast United States pulls no punches. It is fascinating. I am an unabashed Andrew Jackson admirer. But how he ever got away with what he did confuses me. Aaron Burr was charged with treason and tried four times for only thinking about what Jackson executed with impunity. Timing, as they say, is everything.

   Frontier justice, combined with an officially unsanctioned invasion of indisputably Spanish sovereign territory, is accomplished without so much as a truly serious international whimper. Jackson simply ignored and crushed ALL domestic opposition. This event has all the improbable content of the most outrageous novel: land based buccaneering, genocide, invasion, forced removal, betrayal and, most of all, proof that in the early stages of this part of what was going to become a major cornerstone of the future United States, that certain political sections of early America's hierarchy believed that might made right. Absolutely no democratic ideals here. I have never read anywhere what this book made me feel but I truly believe this was Jackson's first formal execution of his and other's concept of Manifest Destiny.

   The authors are excellent. The subject matter is riveting. The local history is fascinating. Jackson is an American original. With all the good he did for his country he had to know that to execute this plan he needed safe harbor in the highest levels of the US government. Thank God he was on our side.




3. The historiographical fortunes of Andrew Jackson have varied over the years from the controversy of his own time to virtual adoration during the New Deal years to today's increasingly jaundiced opinion of the general/politician/Indian fighter.

   The Heiders, professional historians, definitely fall into the disapproving faction that lately has been gaining the upper hand. In part, their work is a logical outgrowth of the current political climate. In the 1930s, when Reform was in vogue, Jackson's role as "reformer" (or, destroyer) of such "elitist" institutions as the Second Bank of the United States and his rough nationalism as expressed towards South Carolina during the nullification crisis played well with the generally liberal guild of historians.

   But, times have changed and with "multi-culturalism" the current fashion, Andrew Jackson is less a frontier hero in the eyes of many than a frontier sociopath with a brutal contempt for both Indians (now called "Native Americans") and blacks. That, at least, is, in part, how the Heider's seem to regard him.

   And, with good reason. Jackson's contempt for the Indians is, despite the apologetics of biographer Robert Remini, too patent to be ignored. His general bloodlust -- he was an extraordinarily violent man in both private and personal life -- don't endear him to modern sensibilities either.

   The Heiders, in this well-researched and well-written book, see Jackson as the Loose Cannon of antebellum America: headstrong, insubordinate, genocidal -- and an out and out liar. His prevarications about his unauthorized seizure of Spanish Pensicola in 1818, which included an after-the-fact falsified map, his summary killing of two British nationals on flimsy pretext and his ruthless persecution of anyone who dared to differ with him leave the Old Hero's moral and ethical standing in tatters.

   To be sure, the Heiders, when presented with two interpretations of Jackson's actions -- his own and that of his enemies -- generally side with the more hostile account. But, their thorough research builds a persuasive case that Jackson was, indeed, out-of-control, arrogant, and a blood-stained imperialist with abiding racial hatreds.

   The Monroe administration found Jackson's actions reprehensible and insubordinate -- but very useful. Thus, the president and his cabinet, led by John Quincy Adams, winked at Old Hickory's depredations. The political popularity of the "Napoeleon of the Woods" made him, as well, too dangerous a potential adversary.

   The book goes into considerable detail and some of it may be lost on those not familiar with its period. Still, it is a valuable antidote to two generations of Jackson-worship on the part of historians. One wonders what, a few generations hence, the view of Jackson will be once the cultural wheel has turned over a few more times from now.




4. This easily readable, complete account of the origins of the Southeast United States pulls no punches. It is fascinating.

   I am an unabashed Andrew Jackson admirer. But how he ever got away with what he did confuses me. Aaron Burr was charged with treason and tried four times for only thinking about what Jackson executed with impunity. Timing, as they say, is everything.

   Frontier justice, combined with an officially unsanctioned invasion of undisputably Spainish soverign territory, is accomplished without so much as a truely serious international whimper. Jackson simply ignored and crushed ALL domestic opposition. This event has all the improbable content of the most outrageous novel: land based buccaneering, genocide, invasion, forced removal, betrayal and, most of all, proof that in the early stages of this part of what was going to become a major cornorstone of the future United States, that certain political sections of early America's hierarchy believed that might made right. Absolutly no democratic ideals here.

   I have never read anywhere what this book made me feel but I truely believe this was Jackson's first formal execution of his and other's concept of Manefest Destiny.

   The authors are excellent. The subject matter is riviting. The local history is fascinating. Jackson is an American original. With all the good he did for his country he had to know that to execute this plan he needed safe harbor in the highest levels of the US government. Thank God he was on our side.




5. An often forgotten episode in American history was the United State's pursuit to gain Florida. Troubles on the border allowed Andrew Jackson to come in at remove the Creek and Seminole people. He invaded a foreign territory and executed citizens of a third county while there. His actions were unauthorized (but with the blessings of the President), but he still got away with it.

   This is one of the few books that covers the First Seminole War. The authors have done their research and used sources that have been ignored in the past. Many factors went into this conflict, and they are all examined. All the political aspects in Washington City, as well as ramifications from the Fort Jackson Treaty of 1815 that disinherited the Creeks.

   The overall impression is that Jackson knew what he wanted and would not let anything get in his way. He pulled off an obviously illegal operation, and got away with it all.

No comments about Orson Welles's Citizen Kane: A Casebook (Casebooks in Criticism).

5 comments about In the Arena: "A Memoir of Victory, Defeat, and Renewal".

1. Why is it pleasurable to read this book ? Because you have the impression of sitting with former President Nixon having him telling you his experience as a politician, truly revealing, with simple but skilled language, anedoctes of his life and his mind about a lot of topics.
   I really enjoyed having this presidential chat with President Nixon and every once in a while I will surely have some other ones by reading some passages of " In the Arena", a memoir narrated not in chronological order, but according to certain matters he deals with.



2. This books tells you very interesting things about Politics and Life in general. Definitely, Richard Nixon was a very intelligent man.
   
   Something I find fascinating and mysterious is that the most intelligent President of USA has been the only one to be dismissed, the one who obtained one of the most landslide victory of USA's electoral history (1972) and the one who had more enemies in the Press.



3. An autobiographical account is always a dicey proposition, and in order to succeed, the author requires a certain amount of objectivity, as well as superior writing skills. Unfortunately, this displays neither.
   
   I'm not here to bash Nixon politically, but I do have to say that the book comes off as extremely self-serving. Nixon's account of Nixon's life just doesn't come off as honest. I think that when he wrote it, he was still too entrenched in a persona that needed to take public opinion into account. The result is a lot of treacly, ponderous prose that comes off like the presidential equivalent of a Hallmark television special.
   
   The one saving grace of the book is that it gives us many little anecdotes that demonstrate the minutiae of the daily life of a President of the United States, and that is indeed interesting. But other than that, there's no reason to pick this up.



4. First of all, I began this book after reading his "No More Viet Nams" which was top notch. Needless to say, I was a bit disappointed with "In The Arena". Nixon covers much about his life in politics and gives us his personal views on life, his wife, family, friends, television, books, and so on. Reading this book was much like listening to your favorite, wise, ol' grandad talking about his life and what he experienced. IF you are not interested in that, don't read this book. You'll be disappointed. Personally, I was more interested in his pointed comments about politics, foreign policies, political leaders, war, and so on but there wasn't enough of that.



5. Since the former president granted my request and sent me a personal autographed copy absolutely free I am biased about this book. I think it is well-written, insightful, personal, and philosophical all in one package. His approach to life was essentially life it to the hilt, have something to show for your existence, hence the title. He was not hesitant to enter "the arena." In fact, his life was lived in the arena. President Nixon was both a thinker and doer.

   While he lived adventurously on two levels, the mental and physical, he was somewhat neglectful of the spiritual arena. He talks about his Christian parents, especially his mother, but he doesn't address spiritual matters in his personal life in any great detail. I know he was on friendly terms with both Billy Graham and Norman Vincent Peale. I'm sure they had some Christian influence on him.

   In this book, the president looks back on life as an elder statesman. Some of the advice he gives is pertinent to any arena. When he talks about living with a purpose that transcends self, the focus is beyond political. He devotes time to the human condition, overcoming personal challenges, victories, defeats, and renewals. This is a well-thought out book. Any open minded reader would be stimulated by it.

No comments about Bismarck (Profiles in Power Series).

2 comments about Roosevelt: Soldier of Freedom 1940-1945.

1. This scholarly, yet elegant, book won the Pulitzer Prize, Francis Parkman Prize, and National Book Award. It thoroughly covers Roosevelt's presidency leading up to and including World War II, and yet the prose is unusually engaging for a work with so much information.
   
   "Soldier of Freedom" covers America's dilemma leading up the war. Should America get involved or not? How should Roosevelt lead an isolationist America to responsibly confront the war that waged in Europe? How should America plan for the threat? What strategy to win the biggest war in history? What kind of peace?
   
   Once the war began, America needed to become mobilized. This book tells the story of war administration in scholarly detail. It covers especially well Roosevelt's diplomacy, so important for victory. He understood that alliances would be crucial to win World War Two, which meant tactful maneuvers and calculated trade-offs. The book also presents Roosevelt's interpretation of the meaning of the war and his vision for a better post-war world.
   
   As one of the reviews states on the back of the book, "Soldier of Freedom" combines rigorous scholarship while being enjoyable to read.
   
   "The Time 100 Most Important People of the 20th Century" named Einstein, Gandi and Franklin D. Roosevelt the three most important people of that Century. This book partly explains why FDR was the most important politician of the 20th Century.
   
   FDR created the modern, powerful presidency. He transformed America from weak, uninvolved isolationism into an active superpower. He established the firm posture of moral, yet pragmatic, international leadership (FDR Americanism) that would serve America (and the world) so well through the Cold War.
   
   James MacGregor Burns, the author, is a great scholar and biographer, and therefore I believe this to be a highly authoritative biography. For example, Burns also wrote one of the best biographies of George Washington. He has authored several excellent works about leadership, including the book "Transforming Leadership." I believe his scholarship is highly authoritative and fair.
   
   I remember reading quotes that Burns made in newspaper stating that Ronald Reagan was "a great or near-great president" because Reagan was a "transforming" president, like Franklin Roosevelt and Theodore Roosevelt. (Reagan, by the way, adored FDR, voted for him multiple times, and attended one of FDR's inaugurations - a deeply moving event for Reagan).
   
   General readers interested in Franklin Roosevelt can also choose from many other one-volume biographies by other authors, such as Black's superb "Champion of Freedom," "Leuchtenburg's "Franklin D. Roosevelt," Friedel's "Rendezvous with Destiny," or Jenkins' brief "Franklin Delano Roosevelt."
   
   Finally, Roosevelt was a powerful speaker. In one survey of speech experts, Roosevelt was ranked the greates presidential speeker, with Reagan coming in second. (Reagan borrowed heavily from Roosevelt, both in style and content). Roosevelt's inauguration speech in 1940 is regarded as one of the ten greatest presidential speeches. It wonderfully defined the impending struggle for freedom against Hitler. Here is Roosevelt's speech:
   
   "On each national day of inauguration since 1789, the people have renewed their sense of dedication to the United States.
   
   "In Washington's day the task of the people was to create and weld together a nation.
   
   "In Lincoln's day the task of the people was to preserve that Nation from disruption from within.
   
   "In this day the task of the people is to save that Nation and its institutions from disruption from without.
   
   "To us there has come a time, in the midst of swift happenings, to pause for a moment and take stock--to recall what our place in history has been, and to rediscover what we are and what we may be. If we do not, we risk the real peril of inaction.
   
   "Lives of nations are determined not by the count of years, but by the lifetime of the human spirit. The life of a man is three-score years and ten: a little more, a little less. The life of a nation is the fullness of the measure of its will to live.
   
   "There are men who doubt this. There are men who believe that democracy, as a form of Government and a frame of life, is limited or measured by a kind of mystical and artificial fate that, for some unexplained reason, tyranny and slavery have become the surging wave of the future--and that freedom is an ebbing tide.
   
   "But we Americans know that this is not true.
   
   "Eight years ago, when the life of this Republic seemed frozen by a fatalistic terror, we proved that this is not true. We were in the midst of shock--but we acted. We acted quickly, boldly, decisively.
   
   "These later years have been living years--fruitful years for the people of this democracy. For they have brought to us greater security and, I hope, a better understanding that life's ideals are to be measured in other than material things.
   
   "Most vital to our present and our future is this experience of a democracy which successfully survived crisis at home; put away many evil things; built new structures on enduring lines; and, through it all, maintained the fact of its democracy.
   
   "For action has been taken within the three-way framework of the Constitution of the United States. The coordinate branches of the Government continue freely to function. The Bill of Rights remains inviolate. The freedom of elections is wholly maintained. Prophets of the downfall of American democracy have seen their dire predictions come to naught.
   
   "Democracy is not dying.
   
   "We know it because we have seen it revive--and grow.
   
   "We know it cannot die--because it is built on the unhampered initiative of individual men and women joined together in a common enterprise--an enterprise undertaken and carried through by the free expression of a free majority.
   
   "We know it because democracy alone, of all forms of government, enlists the full force of men's enlightened will.
   
   "We know it because democracy alone has constructed an unlimited civilization capable of infinite progress in the improvement of human life.
   
   "We know it because, if we look below the surface, we sense it still spreading on every continent--for it is the most humane, the most advanced, and in the end the most unconquerable of all forms of human society.
   
   "A nation, like a person, has a body--a body that must be fed and clothed and housed, invigorated and rested, in a manner that measures up to the objectives of our time.
   
   "A nation, like a person, has a mind--a mind that must be kept informed and alert, that must know itself, that understands the hopes and the needs of its neighbors--all the other nations that live within the narrowing circle of the world.
   
   "And a nation, like a person, has something deeper, something more permanent, something larger than the sum of all its parts. It is that something which matters most to its future--which calls forth the most sacred guarding of its present.
   
   "It is a thing for which we find it difficult--even impossible--to hit upon a single, simple word.
   
   "And yet we all understand what it is--the spirit--the faith of America. It is the product of centuries. It was born in the multitudes of those who came from many lands--some of high degree, but mostly plain people, who sought here, early and late, to find freedom more freely.
   
   "The democratic aspiration is no mere recent phase in human history. It is human history. It permeated the ancient life of early peoples. It blazed anew in the middle ages. It was written in Magna Charta.
   
   "In the Americas its impact has been irresistible. America has been the New World in all tongues, to all peoples, not because this continent was a new-found land, but because all those who came here believed they could create upon this continent a new life--a life that should be new in freedom.
   
   "Its vitality was written into our own Mayflower Compact, into the Declaration of Independence, into the Constitution of the United States, into the Gettysburg Address.
   
   "Those who first came here to carry out the longings of their spirit, and the millions who followed, and the stock that sprang from them--all have moved forward constantly and consistently toward an ideal which in itself has gained stature and clarity with each generation.
   
   "The hopes of the Republic cannot forever tolerate either undeserved poverty or self-serving wealth.
   
   "We know that we still have far to go; that we must more greatly build the security and the opportunity and the knowledge of every citizen, in the measure justified by the resources and the capacity of the land.
   
   "But it is not enough to achieve these purposes alone. It is not enough to clothe and feed the body of this Nation, and instruct and inform its mind. For there is also the spirit. And of the three, the greatest is the spirit.
   
   "Without the body and the mind, as all men know, the Nation could not live.
   
   "But if the spirit of America were killed, even though the Nation's body and mind, constricted in an alien world, lived on, the America we know would have perished.
   
   "That spirit--that faith--speaks to us in our daily lives in ways often unnoticed, because they seem so obvious. It speaks to us here in the Capital of the Nation. It speaks to us through the processes of governing in the sovereignties of 48 States. It speaks to us in our counties, in our cities, in our towns, and in our villages. It speaks to us from the other nations of the hemisphere, and from those across the seas--the enslaved, as well as the free. Sometimes we fail to hear or heed these voices of freedom because to us the privilege of our freedom is such an old, old story.
   
   "The destiny of America was proclaimed in words of prophecy spoken by our first President in his first inaugural in 1789--words almost directed, it would seem, to this year of 1941: "The preservation of the sacred fire of liberty and the destiny of the republican model of government are justly considered ... deeply, ... finally, staked on the experiment intrusted to the hands of the American people."
   
   "If we lose that sacred fire--if we let it be smothered with doubt and fear--then we shall reject the destiny which Washington strove so valiantly and so triumphantly to establish. The preservation of the spirit and faith of the Nation does, and will, furnish the highest justification for every sacrifice that we may make in the cause of national defense.
   
   "In the face of great perils never before encountered, our strong purpose is to protect and to perpetuate the integrity of democracy.
   
   "For this we muster the spirit of America, and the faith of America.
   
   "We do not retreat. We are not content to stand still. As Americans, we go forward, in the service of our country, by the will of God."



2. This is Mr. Burns' companion volume to his Lion and the Fox (check that out). This focuses on FDR's WWII War Administration: policies, attitudes, hopes and worldly goals.

   FDR's dedication to the well-being of the United States in WWII is evidenced by the fact that to start with, he didn't want a third term in office come 1940. Indeed, such aspirations were frowned upon in the political community. It did not stop him; as he saw it, it was his duty and obligation to the American people to keep familiar leadership in time of international turmoil. Other obstacles: struggles to arm allies, constant planning and meeting with allied leaders, and gradual, failing health. Burns also shows FDR's political savvy, using the utilization for war to the nation's advantage. Many unemployed workers were put back to work, which helped shift American industry into an overdrive that didn't stop for decades. Vision: as a disciple of Woodrow Wilson, he had a vision of a United Nations. One that he did not live to see.

   For anyone reading about FDR, or World War II, this companion volume on his war administration is a must for anyone's collection, as it has become in mine.

5 comments about Saddam: His Rise and Fall.

1. Some reviewers are judging this book based on their personal opinions about the Iraq War. But this book was originally written in 2002 and the Iraq War is only briefly discussed in a short epilogue. Of course, the situation there is even worse today, though Coughlin does mention the difficulties that lie ahead.
   
   The fact is that this book is that not a political treatise. But is instead a well written biography that begins with Saddam's birth around 70 years ago in a small, poverty stricken village near Tikrit. He experienced what was apparently a horrific childhood with an abusive step-father. Around age 10 he was sent off to live with his Nazi sympathizer uncle, Tulfah Khairallah. As a young adult Saddam began to rise through the Baath Party ranks, considered an effective thug and hitman who was willing to do the party's "dirty work" against potential enemies. Eventually Saddam's ruthless brutality enabled him to become the dictator of Iraq. Of course, from there his atrocities only grew worse, including the gassing of the Kurds and over a million left dead during his bloody 8 year war against Iran. Meanwhile the United States, the Soviet Union, France and Germany all supported Iraq with military supplies and assistance during this time, apparently considering him the "lesser of two evils" compared to Iran.
   
   Coughlin does an excellent job in presenting the psychological and cultural background that produced Saddam. Still it remains hard to fathom the type of mentality that could lead someone to order the horrific number of murders and torture cases that occurred during his reign. Saddam was a vicious tyrant. But this book also presents a realistically bleak portrait of Iraq's political environment that offers no easy solutions for a better future without him.
   
   I think Bush and the neo-cons were incredibly naive going into this war believing that they could turn Iraq into a Western style democracy. As a result the situation there is a disaster. But regardless of your political opinions on the war, this is an excellent biography of Saddam that will increase the knowledge of anyone that reads it.



2. Someone must be suffering from cold feet.
   
   The Iraqi army has dissolved and disintegrated and regrouped into small widely separated divisions, up to now incapable of organized performances, least of all policing Baghdad.
   
   The world ridiculed the idea that Saddam had amassed weapons of mass destruction (now ironically referred to as `had the potential capability of possessing WMD' - you see! the legend `potential' was simply added to give an evasive answer to the question `why has the UN decided to remove Saddam?'
   
   Now we listen to bits and pieces of a so-called `Saddam's court martial', where Saddam has been exhausting the court but never exhausted, engaging everyone in heated arguments, until the judge was on the verge of losing his temper. Indeed he lost it and dismissed Saddam.
   Saddam won the day!!!!
   It was a great personal victory for Saddam.
   Of course no one has any means of knowing who's really speaking the truth.
   The coalition forces believed they had at last a revealing insight into the state of Saddam's mind after his dishonourable capture, but the way the ex-president is treated in court leaves a lot to be desired.
   
   Many responsible officials after Saddam were about to commiserate on their heavy responsibilities despite the support they have been getting from the `strongest power on this planet'
   
   I saw the look of dismay in the eyes of those who read this prematurely written book; perhaps the author thought that Saddam would be a dead corpse by the time this epistle had been published.
   Who knows!
   And Iraq, in the absence of as strong a government, is still in terrible predicament.
   The battle for Saddam Hussein is virtually beginning.
   To many laypersons in the Arab world, the `story' does not seem to be finishing soon, and the author will have to revisit the last four years brimful with additional important material for his readers.



3. A good detailed account of how Saddam used brutal stalinist methods to take control of Iraq. His control of Iraq was so complete that it took a strong outside force to bring him down.



4. I love the way Saddam's dreaded Anfal Campaign where he murdered over 100,000 Iraqi Kurds in just one year in the 1980's is given depth by the author. As for why the US did not stop Saddam during this time; well the Cold War with the Soviet Union was still going on at this time and the US was still slightly paarlyzed by the pacifist movement of 1970.
   
   Back to this book it would be 5 stars without the homosexual reference Coughlin put in.



5. I would have givin this book a 0 star but that option wasnt availabe.This author really needs to do his research all over again.For instace on page 7 he talks about the "7 pillars of islam"when actually there only is 5 PILLARs in Islam.This might not seem like a big deal but througout this book you find little lies here and there.And by the time you finish the book it turns into one big lie.The author mentions that Saddam gassed his people but FAILS to mention that it was our government of the USA that supplied it to him.He protrays Bush and his administration as heros bet he feels dumb now after we found no WMDs and that we screwed the whole nation up.For some truth read "forbidden truth".And also read the PNAC doctrine.Dont waste your time with this book.

1 comments about LIFE OF GEORGE WASHINGTON, THE.

1. This is the only Washington biography written by a contemporary who knew him and served with him in the Army. Certainly the longest Presidential biography I know of written by a U.S. Supreme Court Justice. According to Senator Beveridge's later biography of John Marshall, Marshall wrote it in installments, and sold it through the U.S. Post Offic distribution network, to make enough money to pay off his massive Virginia land purchsse which in turn enabled Marshall's children to live out their lives free of the need to write books or make land deals. And it worked that way. But that's not all this is.

   The first entire volume says little about Washington, because Marshall felt he needed to set the stage with a condensed history of the colonies prior to Washington. Few of Washington's later biographers went to such subsequent introductory lengths, but then Marshall's law practice ended up acquainting him with the early pre-history of the deeds and conveyances of Virginia, the further elaboration of which can be interpreted as enveloping the rest of the colonies.

   This is also a history of the U.S. Army, and how it fought and starved in successive cycles which are described in minute detail exceeding most other accounts. Some of this covers organized military campaigns preceding the declaration of independence, the scope of which I had not heretofore realized by undergoing annual waves of pilgrim-study in "My Early Education."

   Leading and embodying this story of land and armies, and ideas, Marshall gives us Washington, illuminated most clearly by excerpts from Washington's own letters. Marshall also gives us Marshall, distilling out of military examples and instances of weak government preceding 1789, potent arguments for increased federal power to do the things our federal government has since done quite well: raise armies, raise taxes, subdue the Indians, kick out the European powers, build a strong navy, and take no back talk from smallish tyrants resentful of centralized governmental power directly and simultaneously exercised on each citizen, and on each state.

   When Hamilton wrote that we need "energy in the Executive" he had to have been thinking of Washington, and Marshall catalogs this energy with meticulous documentation of each British officer leading campaigns against us, each subordinate officer on our side under Washinton's command, and how the constant maneuver of armies up and down the length of our seaboard was accomplished--usually without many shoes and without much dry powder.

   So Marshall knowing Washington probably insulated him from too much disconnected iconography, and his writing is free of modern fixations on negative or unseemly personal or pychographic tidbits of trivia. Modern readers are left to cling to factual reporting of how Washington handled this British Lord or that recalcitrant congress.

   There's a lot here in all five volumes, and the flow of the over-written parts isn't that bad once you get used to it. When one man had such a central role in all of the key events of our country's founding, and rode out the formation into its institutional phase, thereafter to die in bed at home, Marshall may not have been able to write it any other way than to go over all of the events, to catch the essence of the man.

   Neat discovery: LaFayette was only 24 years old while commanding the French at the battle of Yorktown. Marshall quotes from the letters of Cornwallis (or maybe it was Sir Henry Clinton) who refers to LaFayette as "the boy." This is the same boy who later presented Washington with the key to the Bastille, which today hangs on the wall of the stairway of Mount Vernon going up to the second floor.

5 comments about Sellout: The Inside Story of President Clinton's Impeachment.

1. I read this from cover to cover and found that Mr. Schippers substantial information listed. However, I also found that all but one accusation was pure speculation and was mostly contradicted by contrary evidence. I'm a firm believer in innocent until proven guilty.
   
   Schippers Claimed that Clinton & Gore pushed to get Aliens registered so they can vote for Democrats.
   - Wrong. The INS was way behind schedule and so Gore and Clinton both pushed to get on track. Needless to say, It was a really bad idea as people serving time found themselves being naturalized.
   
   He also claims that Clinton coached Lewinsky, Curie and Vernon.
   - Correct. He did seem to advocate denial and probably even directed Lewinsksy on how to set up an affidavit so she wouldn't have to testify.
   
   Lewinsky's affidavit was purchased in exchange for a job she wasn't qualified for.
   - Unsubtiated. She did create a affidavit and found a job that Schippers considered her to be unqualified for.
   
   He stated that Paula Jones's affidavit was purchased in a out of court deal.
   The record was sealed shortly afterwards.
   
   He raped Juanita Broddrick.
   - Unknown. This coming from a 3rd party, not Ms Broddrick. In '92, Miss Broddrick signed an affadavit stating that Clinton didn't rape her.
   
   * Clinton and Gore deliberately solicited donations from foreign governments.
   Clinton requested a thorough investigation of the issue, resulting in several friends of Clinton and Gore being convicted. But no one could find a tie to Clinton/Gore despite the flowing testimony. Schippers claimed that he was not given sufficient time to investigate the issue.



2. Chicago attorney David Schippers accepted the historic and ultimately thankless task of prosecuting the President of the United States of America. When the House of Representatives passed Articles of Impeachment against President Clinton, it marked only the second time in US history that a president had been impeached. "Sell Out" is the account of Mr. Schippers going to Washington.
   
   Unlike the previous impeachment of President Andrew Johnson, there are few members of the Senate likely to be immortalized as "Profiles in Courage" for displaying heroism and integrity during the trial. Schippers was not given a meaningful opportunity to present his full case before the Senate. Relevant evidence was suppressed. Unlike the House of Representatives which performed its constitutional duties, the Senate wanted no part of the impeachment and several notables worked behind the scenes to make certain that Clinton would obtain a prompt acquittal regardless of his guilt. The show trial that resulted bordered upon theater of the absurd.
   
   Columnist Ben Stein observed that whatever one might think of former President Richard M. Nixon, he had the underlying decency to resign rather than subject the nation to an impeachment proceeding and a trial. Clinton had no such scruples and chose to play politics. Character assassination attacks (remember the F.B.I. raw files that the White House improperly collected after Clinton was first inaugurated?) were conducted against several Representatives who took an active role in pressing the impeachment issue, including the late Henry Hyde.
   
   Following Hyde's recent death, it has been reported that the leaders of the House of Representatives were prepared to accept a resolution censuring Clinton for perjury, but attempts by the White House to blackmail various members of the Congress by exposing past scandals in their private lives had an unintended consequence: rather than causing Congress to dismiss the censure resolution, it actually stiffened the resolve of those favoring impeachment and solidified several wavering votes of those who had been sitting on the fence.
   
   This book paints a damning picture of the political class that is bipartisan. Senator Trent Lott wanted no part of the impeachment and scolded the House Managers for bringing the case. This is a depressing, but nonetheless vital read. It seems especially relevant in light of the fact that another election featuring the Clintons is fast approaching.
   
   The short book contains numerous pages of documents and exhibits. The actual text is not that lengthy as exhibits make up a considerable portion of the volume. The narrative is adequate, but not quite perfect otherwise I would have rated the book higher than I did above.



3. Do you remember: "Just the facts mam".I am glad that I read this book before the 2008 election. I have a few questions--1. Why did Janet Reno and the Justice Department refused to cooperate with the investigation? 2.Why is it that some people want to kill the messenger than look at the message? 3.Why did 5 Democratic congressmen (Barney Frank-Mass., Howard Berman-Calf.,Rick Boucher-Va.,Jerrold Nadler-Ny., Melvin Watt-NC.) on the committee, never signed into the secure room to view the evidence? 4.What evidence is sealed and under lock and key for the next fifty years? I do not have a short memory and I will remember. I am amazed and disappointed that some Republicans and Democrats were not familiar with honesty, justice, good moral character and doing the right thing. Thank you David Schippers, the title Sell Out-fits like a glove.



4. Note that this review is long after the publication of this book but Mr. Schippers' book is a timeless monument to his integrity and a searing indictment of our Congress and especially Bill Clinton and friends.
   
   An even greater travesty is that this book apparently was given a "pass" by the mainstream intelligentsia and dismissed by the mainstream media.
   
   If you really care about this country and its poloitical future, please read this book. I implore you to do so with an open mind. I acknowledge that I am a Republican but this book should worry readers on both sides of the aisle.
   
   Mr. Schippers is a great American and my nominee for a Medal of Freedom. The Constitution really means something to him in its most literal language.



5. This is quick revisionism from a hired gun. Perhaps the events of the Clinton presidency are too soon for anyone, liberal or conservative, to be objective, but it will never happen if people keep buying books like this.