5 comments about God and George W. Bush: A Spiritual Life.

1. When Mr. Bush came to Washington seven years ago, he came with great optimism to do great things. Then, destiny took a hand and turned the world upside down. And, in the middle of it all was this man who had been placed there for such a time as that. Difficult times required difficult decisions and he made them. Some hated him for it, most supported him but in time, many grew weary of him. He was the prominent symbol of one of the most trying times in America's history. While the page will enevitably be turned, I pray the America I love does not regress to the politics of unsubstantative, mindless, flowery rhetoric of most of the 1990's. I like to think that this nation - most of it - has finally grown up and left behind all hippie narcissm. I am one of the 30%(if the polls are correct) who still support the President. It's easy to criticize in hind sight. But, he has done what he's believed to be right as best as he has been able to given the support and resources around him. I recommend this book. Buy it, read it and say a prayer for this great man.



2. The title itself is unintentionally funny. Waging a war of aggression, benefiting the rich instead of the poor---please. If Bush is spiritual,
   then God help us all.



3. It's only fair to read both sides of the story. Therefore after a couple of books critical of George W. Bush and the Religious/Christian Right/Conservatives I figured it's only fair to read one in support of the former, most likely it being in support of the latter too.
   
   So after "With God On Their Side", after "Roads To Dominion", after "Close Encounters With The Religious Right", after "What's Wrong With Kansas?" and after "The Faith Of George W. Bush" by Stephen Mansfield I read this one. And going for full disclosure, I also read "Fortunate Son" by James Hatfield.
   
   And the last one 'enjoys' an infamous reputation of being a full fledged dismantling of GWB. However, Hatfield's book still stroke me as being more fair, more balanced and all in all more neutral in tone, than this cheerleading effort by Paul Kengor.
   
   My tolerance ended on page 210 when there was a paragraph implying that Saddam Hussein was involved in the events of September 11. Before you jump at me and talk about the 'atmosphere' of support that was in Iraq for the terrorists and for Al Qaida, that's not even what Kengor is writing about. He's basically saying that Saddam was about as much involved as you can get, shy from flying one of the planes himself. And that is just false.
   
   This shows Kengor's agenda. And that's why it does not come as a surprise that he leaves out the US support for Saddam during the Iran vs Iraq war (a war he also writes about, plus he mentions "He tried to kill my dad.") Just like "Faith & George W. Bush" he also leaves out 'those missing years', the controversy about his guard service, how he failed as a business man, etc. etc. etc. instead doing his best effort to characterize and portray Bush as messianic and infallible as possible, without being blasphemous about it.
   
   Therefore the conclution is: it's a biased effort by a supporter, who sugarcoats everything the man does, putting him on a pedestal, glorifying him unquestionably.
   
   And I don't like that. I believe that there's always two sides to a story. That's why I read this book after all. A good book to me shows both sides, albeit it may put the emphasis on one. However, this one doesn't. Oh, not even remotely.



4. I don't believe that God would have anything to do with this man. It's time to get un-programmed, America. Start thinking outside of your cage and see this man for what he is - a patron of evil. Mr. Bush has successfully passed the so-called "Patriot Act" that can and eventually will take away your God-given unalienable rights. How many rights will you loose before you draw your line in the sand? He has no regard for the Constitutional Republic that this country was founded on, instead he insists on a Democracy. Spying on Americans is OK with Mr. Bush. Our borders are left unguarded while our children die in a war for oil. Mr. Bush has said that "it would be easier if this were a dictatorship, as long as I'm the dictator". That statement when heard is chilling to say the least. Would God inspire a man to say something like that? I strongly doubt it. Wake up America! We're being led down the road to tyranny by this man! Don't support him by buying this book. Buy a bible instead.



5. are not part of the gospel of Jesus Christ. That so many think that Bush is a man of god shows how little the gospels are actually read. Jesus had only disdain for the rich and endless compassion for the poor and marginalized. Yet Bush's tax cuts are mostly for the rich and his drug program for seniors greatly aids big pharma. And Bush lied us into the war in Iraq and continues to lie every time he says the war there makes this country safer, when our own national intelligence estimates show that it does not.
   Shame, Mr Bush.

5 comments about Ask Not: The Inauguration of John F. Kennedy and the Speech That Changed America.

1. An enjoyable book on one of the most famous political speeches ever. It provides good insight into the development of "Ask Not," but there is an over-arching bias running through the book.
   
   The reader gets the distinct impression that Clarke has decided that Kennedy is THE author of this famous speech and then crafts the evidence to support that theory. Given JFK's symbiotic relationship with special counselor Ted Sorensen, it is just not credible to believe that the tall man from Nebraska did not make the same type of contribution to this speech as he did to the rest of the Kennedy material.
   
   Clarke has an annoying habit of assuming what people may have been thinking about some topic, e.g. Historian Michael Beschloss "presumably relied on Schlesinger" as a source for an anecdote or "White House aide Arthur Schlesinger may have been thinking of (James) Meridith when he concluded ... A Thousand Days, by saying that "the energies Kennedy released, the purpose he inspired, the goals he established would guide the land he loved for years to come." That, like much of his suppositions is quite a jump.
   
   To be fair to Clarke, he does make an excellent effort to present the chronology of the speech development as he sees it. However, in presenting his thesis that Kennedy created the speech almost on his own, he suggests that people like Sorensen, private secretary Evelyn Lincoln and others misremember many of the relevant events. He gets totally hung up on "proving" that it was Kennedy who came up with the "Ask Not" phrase writing "We can assume ..... that Kennedy would have come across" similar historical references or "He must also have been familiar with" a similar exhortation from his prep school headmaster, a suggestion which Sorensen debunks in his 2008 book Counselor: A Life at the Edge of History
   
   
   
   Give Clarke credit. A significant amount of research went into this book, but to this reviewer at least he fails to prove his key thesis. He also is not afraid to mention - shall we say, Kennedy's foibles and human weaknesses. I actually reference somewhat humorously (I hope) the brand image that JKF had back in my homeland Ireland when I was growing up in Why Ireland Never Invaded America At the end of the day, it hardly matters who contributed what. The thoughts and philosophy WERE Kennedy. It was a speech that lifted a nation that needed lifting and kudos to everyone involved in its development.



2. This was one of the best books i have read about J.F.K. and was taken back in to the 60's and as if i was there.So uplifting.



3. and if this is how he writes for Vanity FAir, whoa, who's their copyeditor?
   
   We do not do well to speak ill of the dead.
   
   I bought this in greeat hopes it would be a scholarly historico-literal textual analysis. Instead I soon got stuck in a thick swamp of unsupported, unchecked tabloid gossip and sniping, laden with cliche catch phrases like "white noise (both the ocean and jets)" and how JFK's fear of solitude and horror of boredom later combines to be a supposed horror of solitude . . .
   
   THe writing is very poor, the research is worse, and unverified from at least wto independent sources, and the hypothesis he alleges to hold, that Ted Sorenson did not write the Inaugural Address, he goes on to disprove.
   
   Yet TEd in actuality served no more function than a Harvard Grad research assitant, taking notes from JFK for themes and structure and format, receiving from JFK catchphrases and syntax and semantics, checking sources, forming rough outlines that were later rejected or at best adapted, etc. JFK wrote and spoke, and IMPROVISED his Inaugural Address, listed as one of the all-time greaets American speeches. And Yet the GREATEST SPEECH never given in all of American HIstory is JFK's Second Inaugural, which would have saved our nation from the disaster we all now live.
   
   Unfortunately the author of this work wallows in miserable petty interpersonal details and allegations of personal habits of the president which cannot be verified. He faintly dismisses some allegations in such as way as to present them as fact, in fact.
   
   THe most valuable part of this book is presented in italicized Roman Numerals, the actual address, which takes all of three pages, and then the ending where Boy GEorge Bush plagiarizes and destroys the JFK Inaugural Address. But the edition of the Address presented here varies greatly from that which I closely studied a quarter century ago. This one reads like the REader's Digest version. If it does sound "bellicose" remember it was written in a time in which Senator Joe MacARthy still cast a chilling pall over our nation, in which commie and pinko baiting was rampant, in which one had to act all out anti-commie in order to do anything. In fact in the context of the times, thius speech is a real and orignal and a unique call for negotiation and understanding and common ground and to peace.
   
   THe middle is just puff and airy filling you can get from Kitty Kelly (who is actually better substantiated and researched) or any tabloid or late night talk show host any day of the week as the character assassination of this greatest American family continues under our present imposed unelected regime.
   
   Once we were Kings, the once and future Kings, of a free and a just and a peaceful, contented world.
   
   And where did they get that absolutely bad cover photo, the worst they could have gotten, that gives no true image of the man?
   
   
   For a more scholarly approach to this address get Sounding the Trumpet instead. A great DVD is included.



4. If you are looking for a book which will use primary documents to discover if JFK did a large amount of the writing of his inauguration speech, then Clarke has written your wish. Well researched with excellent use of primary documents, Clarke asserts that JFK was indeed the author of his own speech.
   
   
   However, Clarke's arguement is hurt on two fronts.
   
   The first is that he is an obvious Kennedy worshiper. Though I agree that no historian is able to completely remove bias, Clarke's praise and defense of Kennedy in all aspects of life begin to wear thin on the reader. By the end of the book, one wonders if Clarke wrote the book not so much to discover who wrote the famous line "ask not." but rather to praise his role model.
   
   The second is Clarke spends way too much time on other issues. From the writing of FDR's inauguration to JFK's relationship with Jackie, Clarke covers subjects that are not dealt with in depth due their importance or with any real link to the writing of ingaugural.
   
   For those wanting to see excellent research on the speech, they do get a good book. However, they have to muddle through alot of unexplained Camalot praise.



5. This is a short, interesting, and satisfying read. It follows closely, and as factually as is possible, the development of this historic speech. I think it does a good job of finding and exploring the influences and authorship of the speech as well as the editing and construction of the speech - its amazing to see how much each word and phrase is considered, changed and laboured over.
   
   Something which adds weight to the book, is the authors ability to depict the feeling and temper of the time. Kennedy obviously brought some new hope to America and was also just a very popular, charismatic figure. There are some good, revealing anecdotes which i have not come across in reading other kennedy books. The book goes into quite a bit of detail about a very short period of time which gives also a closer insight into their day to day lives and habits.
   
   For mine, Kennedy comes across as an intelligent and sincere man. His ideals are admirable and i think he was the real author of this important speech. I'm not so interested in the complete and utter originality of Kennedy's ideas, what is more important is that he selected, developed and articulated them in a way that spoke directly to the world and will leave an indefinite mark.
   
   Overall, a beaut little book, i really enjoyed it.

4 comments about Hitler (Profiles in Power).

1. This is a good read, but like most books on Hitler it's all pretty much the same.



2. This book Focuses on the power structure of the nazi party. It doesn't reveal much about personalities or everyday life, but describes the interrelation between the beauracrats, industrialists, land owners, populace, and nazi party members. It is appropriate for anyone interested in political structures and how they are held together. It gives a fascinating look into the accumulation of power into one charismatic leader and the appointed henchmen/disciples who would literrally do anything to please the whims of their demigod, and thus gain more power for themselves, And how this monopolistic and 'anarchic' power structure ultimately led to such a terribly disfunctional outcome.



3. Ian Kershaw is the premier historian on Hitler and Nazi Germany and this book from the Profiles in Power series is an excellent study on the roots, success, and ultimate destruction of the "Fuehrercult." Two schools of thought are used by historians to understand the power of Nazism. "Intentionalists" see the Nazi regime as the embodiment of Hitler as the totalitarian leader. "Structuralists," however, believe the policies and, ultimately, the crimes of Nazi Germany were stumbled upon by underlings working under a loose framework rather than a deliberate program. As one would expect, Kershaw takes from both these theories to develop his comprehensive profile.

   Kershaw examines Hitler's worldview of racial struggle, anti-Semitism, and living space for the German empire--how these ideas developed (Hitler's background) and how Hitler used them to create his leadership image. This Fuehrercult unified a fractional party, helped repress opposition, and created a mass following. Through Hitler's charismatic leadership the German people would be prepared to fight the Nazi fight (inevitably WWII). Kershaw also looks at the feudal-like power relations inside the Third Reich; a regime of open-ended decrees that left no "smoking gun" pointing at Hitler for the Final Solution. Finally, Kershaw examines the destruction of Hitler's power during which the irrational optimism that "Providence" (i.e. Hitler's will) would prevail was still believed by many (particularly the 'court' of Hitler's bunker). I recommend this book especially to advanced history students who want an in-depth examination of Hitler's power in a compact 230-page book. The book includes footnotes, an index, a chapter on further readings, and a chronology of events.




4. It is not your typical biography of Hitler. It is a thorough examination and analysis of Hitler's rise to power. It examines how he got power, how he maintained power, how he used power, and, finally, how he lost power. Quite an interesting book. Be sure to check out other books in this "Profiles in Power" series.

No comments about The Political Lincoln: An Encyclopedia.

No comments about Cornell Capa: Jfk For President.

5 comments about Churchill Wanted Dead Or Alive: Wanted Dead or Alive.

1. The author, Celia Sandys, is the subject's granddaughter. As such, she had access to papers, people, and places that few individuals have. She presents a view of the early Churchill (age 20-25) that gives one an objective glimpse of his early life, ambitions, and personality. She has done much field research by access to original papers, actual locations, and descendants of those who knew Churchill in his early 20s. Much of her research is centered in South Africa where the young Churchill had a yen for being where the action was in the Boer War, and having an inordinate amount of luck escaping death and danger. Additionally, she gives detailed maps of his movements, and tries to bridle some of his self-sustaining writings that could not be independently verified. This work should give any reader an understanding that Churchill's early years were a prelude to his more famous leadership role during the dark days of World War II. An excellent read.



2. This is the first book that I have ever read about Churchill, so I was very surprised to read example after example of his arrogance and his "at all times" sense of entitlement. His granddaughter (an obviously biased author) recited many of Churchill's actions during the Boer War as examples of his bravery and courage. I, however, interpreted these actions in quite a different manner. One example of Churchill's "bravery" was when his train was ambushed by Boer troops. The author described his behavior as brave and heroic, whereas I viewed his actions as a very calculated tactic for self-advacement. In fact, it was Churchill's fault that the train went so far into Boer territory in the first place--he wanted more information for his newspaper, and his subsequent actions only put the British troops in more danger. The book was also not well written or organized; it reminded me of reading a high school book report.



3. This time last year, appropriately enough, I was reading this book of Churchill's epic escape from the States Model School in Pretoria, an event that had happened 100 years earlier to the very day.The 12 December 1999 was also a day in which I lost a friend in a road accident, thus, the centennial anniversary date becomes etched with the personal. Churchill was clearly a larger-than-life figure all of his life as his grandaughter and author Celia Sandys clearly shows in this historical work in which she followed in his footsteps, visiting campsites, battlefields etc and speaking to descendants of friends and foes alike. Contrary to the assertions of some other reviewers it is a well written and enjoyable book. Some of the interesting vignettes include the detective work the author did on tracking down the gold watches that Churchill had sent to various people for their assistance in his escape from the Boers (or Afrikaners as they are known today). At the time of publication Mrs Sandys had located 6 of the 8 watches. Mrs Sandys is not afraid to challenge Churchill's assertions that he was captured by Gen. Louis Botha himself (later the Union's first Prime Minister, 1910-19)and she rightly dismisses talk that there was ever a romantic entanglement with Helen Botha , the General's daughter. The author is partly correct when she records that Churchill's "huge political ambitions demanded a wife who would be a political asset..." However, that would cut both ways, something Helen Botha alluded to 60 years later when she said it was unlikely that she could fall for him as she was "a Transvaaler." Her father and Churchill may have "got along famously" but it is the author who is disingenous, not Helen Botha, in considering that a personal political rapport could see the leader of the Afrikaner volk, or a member of his family, contemplate such a marriage -particularly after the deaths of some 26,000 Boer women and children in the world's first concentration camps - British concentration camps. Nevertheless, this is a good read about a remarkable soldier-stateman in his younger days. Enjoy.



4. This book presents several interesting vignettes relating to Churchill's life and activities during the South African "Boer" war, but overall I was disappointed, and finished wanting more. Overall, I thought this was rather superficial, and I didn't feel as tho I had gained any substantial insight into the life of one of the giants of the late 19th/early 20th century.



5. I am a great admirer of Sir Winston Spencer Churchill, and so being I read nearly every book that is published. As I write this Mr. Churchill was on the cover of one of our National Magazines last week, and the title was "The Last Hero". A man who is completing another biography of Mr. Churchill's life wrote the story inside.

   A book by his Granddaughter Celia Sandys could be easily dismissed as a biased treatment, a work lacking objectivity. I believe The Authoress did a remarkable job of adding to the Historical Record without being a revisionist in her Grandfather's favor or to his detriment.

   I have read Churchill's own accounts of the adventures contained in this book, and many other books written about this amazing story and I still would recommend it be added to any existing collection of Churchill books.

   Mrs. Sandys manages to bring to light new bits of information that at times reinforce the contemporary accounts, and at other moments confirm what might have been an Historical Embellishment passed down through the years. She portrays her Grandfather with candor, and shares the information she collected while reconstructing herself the trip that her Grandfather made so many years ago.

   Sir Winston Spencer Churchill M.P. has already taken his place in History. He was a man who seemed to know what destiny held for him, and also what History would say. He once said, "I know how History will remember me, as I shall write it." He once described the human race in the following terms, "We are all worms, but I believe I am a glow worm."

   A well written, balanced account of a small part of a life that was full of momentous moments. Mr. Churchill is unique as he is not just part of our History, he is History. That he is still quoted almost daily, new books continue to be written, and a College is to be built confirm this is true.

   When confronted with "if you were my Husband I would put poison in your soup", the retort, "if you were my wife I would eat it." Oh to be at that dinner.

   Thank you Mrs. Sandys.

5 comments about Bill Clinton: An American Journey.

1. Once upon a time there was a first-rate biographer named Nigel Hamilton. Twenty years ago he wrote the definitive three-volume life of Lord Montgomery of Alamein, one that is still the essential source for understanding the man. Then in 1993 the first book of his projected multi-volume biography of John F. Kennedy, JFK: Reckless Youth, was published, a work that will probably remain the essential source for understanding Kennedy's pre-political life for decades to come.
   
   At some point after that, though, Hamilton changed. Perhaps it was a consequence of immersing himself in JFK's salacious life or perhaps it was some sort of traumatic personal experience, but Hamilton's focus changed. The shift emerged in 2001 with his atrociously-named "Full Monty," a reinterpretation of his earlier subject that focuses on Montgomery's sexual orientation. Now we have his latest book, the first of a promised two-volume life of Bill Clinton that covers his life up to his election in 1992. Like the Kennedy biography it is an "unofficial" life; unlike the Kennedy biography, though, Hamilton did not have access to any of the papers from the Clinton Library, which obviously limits much of its scope.
   
   Even when this is taken into account, though, Hamilton has written a lousy book. His primary focus is on Clinton's personal life, which he covers in salacious detail (enough to ensure that his book will occupy a prominent place on the bookshelves of most Clinton-haters) and follows up with superficial psychoanalysis. While I do not doubt the accuracy of his account, the result is Clinton the libido, with little about the political career which is the reason why he warrants our attention to begin with. I grant that Hamilton did not have access to Clinton's papers, but would it have been so hard to glean something about Clinton's tenure as governor from newspaper accounts and interviews with other Arkansas politicos? Without it, the reader is left with the impression that Clinton was elected president based on his charm - a facile impression that does a great disservice to anybody seeking a true understanding of the man.



2. Bill Clinton is a very debated about politician and Nigel Hamilton takes a great stab at his early life. This book ends in 1992 but does an excellent job talking about his childhood growing up, college years, marriage to Hillary and the turbulent times of governor. It captures the rocky relationship with Carter and the pervasiness of Bill Clinton in his early scandals. It clearly captures the relationship with Hillary and puts out some interesting theories for their marriage and why Bill Clinton feels the need to get involved with other women. I highly recommend this book for anyone interested in how Bill Clinton got to the presidency.



3. The forces and dynamics of both the Democratic Party, and the national unrest prevalent during the period that Clinton "rose" to shoulder his duties at the White House during his administration, and the manner in which he went about it suggests that it will be years before the clarity of his personal strengths and weaknesses will be understood fully. Complicated by the number of extraordinary events (including his impeachment process, the innovation of the internet, and the flaws of the political process itself, as they were revealed during the election of 2000, make rushes to judgement less accurate than they are entitled to be in American history. In addition, the unique upbringing of Clinton, his background, and the unusual experiences that preceded his Presidency obscure typical thinking about him within the normal boundaries in which other Presidents have been examined. As one of the most visible of persons, with a staff strikingly involved, and yet removed from his Presidency, it will take years to sort out the important dynamics of his terms, and may be seen as the beginning of an era where Americans, themselves, awakened to the strengths and weaknesses of their democracy to play a greater role in its outcome. He will, no doubt, remain an enigma for years to come both because of what he respresents, and because of his forceful personality, not to mention the importance of his wife, the Senator, who was fully vested in his administration, and continues to play a significant role in American politics as well as American government. It's obvious that Mr. Hamilton's attempts might be much more important in the future, and through development of his second volume, when and if that becomes available in the distance.



4. I tried very hard to like President Clinton's Memoirs. But instead I found myself frustrated at the way his autobiography blames everyone else for Clinton's problems except himself. That being said, while his memoirs frustrated me it causes me to read further about Clinton and fill in the many gaps between the truth and what was presented in My Life by Clinton.
   
   An American Journey is a highly readable, truthfull, and ultimately sympathetic look at Clinton's rise to presidency. The author does not sugarcoat anything and you see the real Bill Clinton: his many strengths and his many weaknesses. I also enjoyed how the author put the situations Clinton was in into the Context of the times and place. I really could not stop reading this book. It is very good and should be read rather than Clinton's memoirs.



5. Once upon a time there was a first-rate biographer named Nigel Hamilton. Twenty years ago he wrote the definitive three-volume life of Lord Montgomery of Alamein, one that is still the essential source for understanding the man. Then in 1993 the first book of his projected multi-volume biography of John F. Kennedy was published, a work that will probably remain the essential source for understanding Kennedy's pre-political life for decades to come.
   
   At some point after that, though, Hamilton changed. Perhaps it was a consequence of immersing himself in JFK's salacious life or perhaps it was some sort of traumatic personal experience, but Hamilton's focus changed. The shift emerged in 2001 with his atrociously-named "Full Monty," a reinterpretation of his earlier subject that focuses on Montgomery's sexual orientation. Now we have his latest book, the first of a promised two-volume life of Bill Clinton that covers his life up to his election in 1992. Like the Kennedy biography it is an "unofficial" life; unlike the Kennedy biography, though, Hamilton did not have access to any of the papers from the Clinton Library, which obviously limits much of its scope.
   
   Even when this is taken into account, though, Hamilton has written a lousy book. His primary focus is on Clinton's personal life, which he covers in salacious detail (enough to ensure that his book will occupy a prominent place on the bookshelves of most Clinton-haters) and follows up with superficial psychoanalysis. While I do not doubt the accuracy of his account, the result is Clinton the libido, with little about the political career which is the reason why he warrants our attention to begin with. I grant that Hamilton did not have access to Clinton's papers, but would it have been so hard to glean something about Clinton's tenure as governor from newspaper accounts and interviews with other Arkansas politicos? Without it, the reader is left with the impression that Clinton was elected president based on his charm - a facile impression that does a great disservice to anybody seeking a true understanding of the man. No doubt that disservice will be continued once Hamilton's second volume is published.

5 comments about General George Washington: A Military Life.

1. I thought this was a well written and informative book. Sometimes we try to portray Washington as a God, but not in this book. Edward G. Lengel gives an unbiased fair view of Washington's military life. Sometimes I believe he was overly critical, but then, I am not a military historian. I would recommend this to anyone interested in the American Revolution.



2. General George Washington: A Military Life by Edward G. Lengel. 2005. 450 pages.
   
   This book covers the military career of George Washington from his days as a youth watching the adventures of his brother through the Seven Years War/French and Indian War, the Revolution, The whisky Rebellion and ends with the former President of the United States (POTUS) Washington still on duty at the end of his life.
   
   This book is primarily concerned with Washington the military man. It provides a good history of his military career and some historical evaluation. The author is not a military man or military scholar; rather he is involved with the George Washington Papers Project. The author's lack of military experience however does not impact his selection of material or his evaluation of Washington the soldier.
   
   While Washington's exploits during the Seven Years War and the Revolution are fairly well known some of the details and the scope of these exploits are often not understood. This lack of understanding is partly the result of our distance from the way things were in the 18th century and partly because Washington was a unique and extraordinary leader and man. In many ways he was much more akin to our modern sensibilities than he was to those of the military establishments of his time. Though he himself operated firmly in an 18th century frame of reference.
   
   Washington was a one man staff system who directed his logistics both on the practical side and on the political side, always wary to avoid burdening the populace and maintaining civilian control and a sense of proper order in the army. Washington was heavily involved in conducting his own intelligence and agitory propaganda work to a degree which modern commanders do not do because much of these functions are delegated to dedicated and specially trained staff.
   
   Peeling back the aspects of Washington's organization and activities which today are handled by a staff we come to the issue of Washington in the traditional sense of a military man as we commonly think of them. Washington was by all accounts of friend and foe a very physically brave man on par even with Hernando Cortez. Washington's ability to lead men was remarkable for a man with little education. He was, compared to his 18th century peers, a very modern leader reinforcing the positive and challenging his men to meet his expectation rather then the blunt bully who used the vine stave.
   
   At a tactical level Washington's forces failed more often than they succeeded. Too often the failure was a result of an overly complicated plan. Though Washington was seemingly always itching for a fight he tended towards plans of such intricate timing and advance that they were often doomed. On the operational and strategic level Washington's talents were much more evident. Though he maintained a fixed obsession with New York City he quickly understood the tie between the revolution and its promise to the country and world and the need to keep his army in the field defying the British.
   
   The notion that Washington was a Fabian in his tactics does not strictly hold water. Washington though recognizing the need to maintain the army as a whole in the field in order to preserve the revolution routinely risked the entire main army in battle. The campaigns in New York City, Brandywine, Germantown, even Monmouth showed a desire for that one decisive action which would decide the issue. The author does understand this.
   
   Washington is so far the only sitting POTUS to, as Commander in Chief, command troops in the field, in uniform as President. This occurred during the Whiskey Rebellion though the mere presence of Washington contributed to the end of the rebellion with out a full scale national conflagration. Washington, in a little known tidbit, also returned to military service after his final term as POTUS. He, at the behest of POTUS John Adams, accepted a commission to ready the American military for potential conflict with France. When Washington died he did so under commission and therefore still technically as a serving military officer in the armed forces of the United States.
   
   This book reads quickly, the prose not being a millstone to the material, and does a fine job of presenting this aspect of Washington to the reader.



3. Well written and researched, the writing style a little difficult at times. I felt the author was over critical of Washington, especially since he spends 99% of the narrative criticizing him and, in the last chapter, alots only a few pages to defending him. Overall a good read, but I would pickup His Excellency by J. Ellis, 1776 by Mccollough, or Washington's Crossing by Fischer first.



4. Bravo Dr. Edward Lenge! This book is a fascinating account of the military career of the Father of our Country! George Washington (1732-1799) was the first US President; a planter at
   Mt. Vernon and is solidly planted as the indispensable man during the American Revolution. Without Washington's grit and
   daring, perseverance and leadership there is a real possibility that the American experiment would have died an early death.
   Washington with a band of rag-tag, often hungry and ill-trained troops defeated the greatest military machine in the eighteeth century in the shape of the British regulars led by General
   William Howe.
   1776 saw Washington victorious in Boston recapturing the city for the patriot cause. 1777 was a bitter year which began brightly with victories at Trenton and Princeton only to founder in the defeats suffered at Brandywine Creek and Germantown.
   The harsh winter of Valley Forge in late 1777-1778 led to a reformulation of the army which pressed ahead to victory over
   Cornwallis at Yorktown in 1781.
   All of the major battles led by Washington are chronicled in
   depth from Boston to Monmouth to final victory. Washington had
   great flaws as a military man; he was sometimes indecisive; overly bold; poor in topographical placing of troops and could
   be harsh. Nevertheless, it was because of his inimitable courage
   and grit which led the army to victory over loyalists, a hard to
   work with Congress and the mighty British army .
   The American Revolution was hardfought, bloody and our freedom was bathed in the blood of brave men and women. This story needs to be told.
   Lengel's book begins with Washington's career in the French and Indian War which culminated in Braddock's defeat; covers the years from 1759-1776 when his acquisition of land, slaves and
   the formation of the Virginia Regiment won him colonial fame to
   the culminating crown of his career; victory in the War of Independence. Washington was a great man who accomplished much with what he had to work with in men, materials and his strong
   willpower never allowing him to quit in tough situations.
   Lengel's book is well illustrated with helpful maps and an impressive bibliography of first person accounts and letters and correspondence from Washington's fertile pen. This is one of the
   best books I have ever read on Washington's military career.
   Well done!



5. This book didn't capture and articulate the struggle of the Continentals in the manner in which "1776" by David McCullough did. It merely laid out facts in a straightforward manner which wasn't that inspiring and quite aseptic. I usually judge the greatness of a book by how often I highlight passages by the author. The cap stayed on my highlighter for most of the book. For students of the era it's a book worth reading, I simply wouldn't put it at the top of my must-read list.

No comments about Yoshida Shigeru: Last Meiji Man.

4 comments about Politics & Pot Roast: An Unofficial, Unauthorized & Completely Unclassified Cookbook.

1. I received this as a gift from a friend who knows I love food and politics. It is terrific with a huge span of notable "recipe contributers", and great anecdotes that accompany the recipes. I ended up buying several more to give as gifts to friends who enjoy the banter, and love getting together for a good meal. Also bought as gifts for family from abroad, visiting Washington DC. I have enjoyed using the recipes for 4th of July, and Memorial (or was it Labor?) Day, as they make great conversation pieces - NOT that I need ideas for conversation :)!



2. More than just a good cookbook, great anecdotes on every president. I'm a high school history teacher, and found out funny facts I didn't know! The recipes are great too, the book worked as a great theme for my Fourth of July party, and everyond loved the food. I would maybe avoid Eisenhower's squirrel stew, but some of my favorites are Thomas Jefferson's macaroos, Lyndon B Johnson's barbeque sauce, and Mamie Eisenhower's fudge is amazing (but not very Atkin's friendly!).



3. With entries for every president and first lady, this book is more than a compendium of recipes. It is an entertaining collection of historical anecdotes including recipes reflecting the culinary habits of our highest elected officials. A perfect gift for anyone in Washington, DC, for a cook who thinks they've seen it all, or a US history buff. The reader is bound to be amused, entertained and well fed. A cookbook that can sit by your bedside table for light reading as easily as used in the kitchen. Five stars for combining history and good food.



4. Last evening I read "Politics & Pot Roast"-and thoroughly enjoyed it. I already have several "White House" cookbooks, but I think Sarah's book is exceptional. She's done a great job of combining interesting recipes and amusing anecdotes about both the Presidents and their wives (many of which I had never read before.) I think the book is just the right size too. This book will be a hit!
   Signed,
   A cookbook fan (I own more than 800 cookbooks!)