5 comments about Fortune's Children.

1. Arthur Vanderbilt II takes great care in researching and describing his own family tree. despite the fact that there are still many Vanderbilts that are missing, such as Frederick Vanderbilt who built the mansion in Hyde Park, NY, the book is a very good quick reference of the family tree.
   This is a must have for historians of the Guiled Age and Vanderbilt family, as Arthur has compiled an extensive bibliography of re fences and primary sources that are immensely important for further research.



2. Extremely interesting account of the demise of the Vanderbilt fortune. Obviously, this will not be available at the Biltmore Estate bookshop!



3. Being a recent visitor to The Breakers and a past visitor to the Vanderbilt mansion on the Hudson River in New York, I am fascinated by this family and their lives.
   I am still reading this book and find it quite interesting, but I would have liked to have a family tree just as another reviewer mentioned and definitely more pictures would have been appreciated.
   
   I know that I will be purchasing other Vanderbilt books to quench my thirst for knowledge of this family.



4. It was like reading a trashy novel - but this is nonfiction. I found it fascinating to read how a mob mentality can take over a person even when it is "mobs" of money surrounding them. Greed and status overtook any common sense, or even love for their children. I now understand why Andrew Carnegie gave all his money away.



5. Since the book was written by a Vanderbilt, I dubiously expected a sanitized version and was delightfully surpised to find the author was brutally honest about the characters covered. This book was engrossing. I could not put it down. The portion about the Gloria Vanderbilt custody case was particularly engaging - what a piece of work the maternal grandmother was. But the book as a whole was a gem - I devoured every page and was sad to see it end.
   I do agree with the previous reviewer who said a genealogical tree would have helped to refer to when reading about the characters and keeping track of how they were all related to each other, especially since the family was so fecund and so many of the men had similiar names. I think it also interesting the author does not mention precisely which branch of the family he is descended from. So perhaps he is trying to maintain some of his own identity. But all in all, this excellent read has whetted my desire to read more about the Vanderbilts, as well as other East Coast aristocratic families.

5 comments about Hell to Pay: The Unfolding Story of Hillary Rodham Clinton.

1. This book was originally published by Barbara Olson in 1999 prior to her tragic death in the 9/11 terrorist attack on the pentagon. The timing is unfortunate in that if this book was just hitting the bookstores now (April 2008) I think it would prove to be Hillary's undoing, much as the Swift Boater's undid John Kerry with "Unfit for Command".
   
   This book is a real eye opener, following Hillary from her high school years through the Clinton White House to her election as a senator from New York. I think Ms. Olson might even have one up on Dick Morris in her documentation of Hillary's past. If even half of what Ms. Olson relates is true this woman should be sitting in a federal penitentiary somewhere, not running for President of the United States, a job she is about as qualified to perform as I am to perform open heart surgery. The book makes it clear that had she not been the First Lady of the United States she probably would have done some time in the slammer. From her shady an often illegal business deals and investments, to her blatant violation of the law by holding Hillarycare meetings in secrete, to funneling money to the PLO and Communist party, to lies, bribes, threats, insults, firings, perjury, blocking investigations, obstructing justice, hiring staff for the White House who couldn't get security clearances or required random drug testing, and altering public documents. Not to mention the fact that people who get too close to the Clintons have a bad habit of turning up dead. Ms Olson depicts Hillary is a one-woman crime wave.
   
   Shortly the American public will be asked to choose between Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama as the Democrat Party's nominee to run for the Presidency of the United States. Anybody who is even entertaining the though of voting for Mrs. Clinton needs to buy this book and read it! And quickly! It sure changed my mind.



2. In an effort to objectively write a key chapter in my book, America, You Will Be Destroyed !: Thus Saith The Lord - and Other Amazing Prophecies I read Ms. Olson's book as a part of my research. While many other Hillary books focused on her and husband Bill's scandals, Olson's book tried to capture the psyche and inner workings of the former First Lady.
   
   I felt that the little, seemingly insignificant or trivial details of her life and childhood helped me to paint a better mental picure of the driving forces in Hillary's life. As a former national and state licensed therapist, the little details helped me to create a case study snapshot. The influences of the feminist movement, her continued pursuit and espousal of radicalism and socialism, her upbringing under a driven father, the upheaval of the 60's, the me-generation of the 70's, the self-consciousness towards her own body (specifically her legs), the disdain and reproachful way Bill treated her... Whew, her issues of being driven, loathing of men in general, thirst for power/dominance and control, all make sense. as another reviewer said, "When peeling back the layers, we need to know this stuff to get at what makes Hillary tick."
   
   Looking at all the background and biographical details makes me realize (and hopefully others) that in her machinations we see clearly that she has not become more conservative or even centrist. She is a radical socialist to the core, and the most frightening thng in this revelation is that she seems to truly believe that she alone is right, that she alone is the people's champion and this sense of righteous indignation fuels her passionately to apire to the pinnacle of power at all costs.
   
   Like a true socialist, Hillary will do anything and everything to obtain power. She will reinvent herself over and over to do so. This book shows clearly that pragmatism is all a pose to make her attractive to the broad electorate. For her, the end (her obtaining power) will justify any means.
   
   By examing the actions/reactions of Hillary during key events such as Whitewater, the Travel agency firings, etc. The reader has an opportunity to see the venal, petty, cruel, vindictive, vulgar and violent side of a woman that is in a position of power and who is wanting yet more. Though all writer's have some non-altruistic motivation(s) for putting pen to paper, the work of digging out new details and reframing existing ones is crucial in the discovery phase of the case against HillaryThe Case Against Hillary Clinton (another work by a different author). There will be "Hell to Pay" if Hillary is elected.



3. One of the best reviews I have read on this personality, and I have read seven books. Underlines the development of her radicalization in politics and how her dysfunctional family of orgin undergirds her indefensible justification of her husband's sex addiction and thereby blaming Christians for his deeds.



4. Since Hillary's own "Living History" was such a sterile and lifeless academic exercise - at least compared to Obama's "Dreams of My Father," or even to Bill's "My Life" -- and thus did powerful little to reveal the real person behind the "political persona," one is forced to stoop (almost embarrassingly so) to "anti-Hillary tracts" (such as I thought this one would be), to peel back the veneer covering the "Hillary Rodham" mystique.
   
   Whether intentional or not, much to my surprise, this book is NOT an altogether uncomplimentary analysis of Mrs. Clinton's life. With many rich details that highlight the good, the bad, and the ugly -- along the often bumpy road her life has taken -- this volume, quite adequately "fills in the blanks" about who the real Mrs. Hillary Rodham Clinton is.
   
   Even though one can clearly see from the title that it was intended to appeal to the "I Hate Hillary Club," it turns out to be amazingly straightforward and free of the usual slander, political vitriol, and below the belt personal jabs that one normally associates with, and expects of books with titles of this sort. Nothing could have been more satisfying than to realize that I had misjudged this book based solely on its cover. I had indeed discounted its value, expecting it to be little more than a carefully disguised "attack ad." And even though much of the juicier aspects of its content seem to have been "culled" from other more respectable sources, it is still much more than just an "attack ad in disguise." It is meaty, coherent, and sticks tenaciously to the main task of trying to unravel, who the person behind the Hillary political persona really is. In short, those looking for an "attack ad" disguised as a book: Well, I am here to tell you, this ain't it. This is not the "National Enquirer's" version of the ex-First Lady's life. Ms. Olson can think and write, and has very high standards for her craft and exercises them all quite well here.
   
   The high points of the book lie in the careful way the author uses the details of her subject's life to outline, against the backdrop of the many layers of American society, the essential elements of Hillary's character and the motivation for her often difficult life choices. The ex-First Lady evolves from a "Goldwater Girl," to a "wide-eyed 1960s Leftist Radical," to Bill's "Hippy gal-pal," to a university Law professor, to a partner in a major law firm, to the ambitious "power grabbing money hungry" political predator that she is now thought by many to be. In the best of the American tradition, she "clawed her way to the top of the food chain."
   
   The public portrait of her is as a person seemingly willing to cut whatever moral corners are needed to advance herself; to protect her Golden Goose (Bill); to grab the brass ring for herself (the U.S. Presidency), and in the end" to find financial security for herself and her family. However, the author is careful to note that she is much more complex than just this demeaning portrait. Hillary does a great deal of good along this very treacherous and tortuous path, especially in improving education in Arkansas, with the Children's Defense Fund, steering Bill's campaigns and comebacks to victory, showing uncommon strength in "facing down" one scandal after another, and in raising consciousness about women issues.
   
   The low point of the book is watching the author get stuck chasing her own tail: Trying to graft her own self-created "Leftist Radical" image onto Hillary. No matter how many Saul Alinsky epigrams she uses, the graft simply does not "take." And the reason is because of the much larger, much deeper picture that the author's own analysis shows the ex-First Lady to be: Hillary, more than anything else, is an evolving political animal that is no longer easy to pigeonhole politically, morally or ethically.
   
   Yet, rather sadly, she misses her own most important lesson and contribution by failing to understand that the corruption of Mrs. Hillary Rodham Clinton, when seen in relief, is little more than a general critique of the American political way of life. For as she so aptly demonstrates, there is nothing unique about Hillary, her personality, her life choices, or her life journey that would make her stand out from the rest of us as predisposed towards political corruption, or towards becoming a "moral retrograde." Yet, as has been the case with so many others of American politicians, she lurched from "Right wing" idealist, to "Left wing" idealist, to a "co-opted and corrupt centrist," to a "bought-and-paid-for" pseudo-liberal democrat, and back into the closet again as a "Right wing Republican in "Democratic clothing."
   
   As a template of how to go from political naiveté to political maturity, Hillary's journey from idealist to corrupt political opportunist, could serve as THE model for anyone who gets caught up in the sausage grinding machinery of American government and politics. The sad fact is that the most likely, and the most probable outcome for any of us, is that we will be consumed by it, and will come out on the other side, grinded into unrecognizable moral mince meat -- a corrupt shell of our previous moral selves. Quite simply, we have a political system that eats and digests its young and spits them out as fertilizer for the next generation.
   
   What was most sobering about the book is that Hillary is the classic case in point. Her life's journey is an object lesson in what not to do. Through her, we can see how truly scary it is that for all but a handful of us, dealt the same hand in life as she, but for the grace of God, we too undoubtedly would have ended up in the same morally corrupt and bankrupt cul de sac that the ex-First Lady now finds herself in: with "unearned riches," dubious but exaggerated accomplishments, hanging on to a failed marriage, and still grasping for a meaningless brass ring, called the U.S. Presidency.
   
   While this is far from a balanced treatment, Hilary's own glossed-over treatment left the door wide-open for a hardnosed assessment, and this is it. Five stars



5. I have never been an admirer of Hillary Clinton. It seemed to me that her "standing by her man" during the Monica Lewinsky scandal was nothing more than a power play. After all, given her pedigree (Wellesley, Yale Law School, her resume and her connections,) it seemed to me that she would not suffer economically if she left Bill Clinton. My instincts told me that there was much more to this than met the eye. In my mind, Hillary Clinton's moving to New York and running for the senate was nothing more than getting her foot in the door to run for President. I had the strong inclination to believe that she had no interest in serving the people of New York. After reading Barbara Olson's book, there is not one shred of doubt in my mind that my instincts about Hillary Clinton were on the money.
   
   Barbara Olson details situation after situation of Hillary's running of the governor's mansion in Arkansas and her stint as co-President in a manner that leaves the reader with not one question that the Clintons are amoral. They are all about power and will stop at nothing to ensure that theirs is kept intact. The blantant illegalities, Bill's womanizing, harassing enemies and their shabby treatment of those who were there to serve them paint a portrait of a couple whose focus in pursuing public office isn't about public service, it's about power acqusition. The thoroughness of the corruption of Hillary and Bill Clinton is absolute and documented in painstaking, thorough detail. The prospect of Hillary Clinton's being in the White House and able to take full advantage of the provisions of the Patriot Act is a terrifying prospect given her amorality. She won't use it to promote national security, she will use it to spy on her enemies. As Barbara Olson shows us so clearly in this book, Hillary Clinton's paranoia knows no bounds.
   
   As frightening as Hillary Clinton's amorality is, her politics are even more frightening. Barbara Olson carefully documented Hillary Clinton's radicalism and her work on children's rights. Wanting to help children is a noble cause in anyone's book, but the reality is that Hillary Clinton's intentions are completely different. As is carefully documented by Barbara Olson, if elected President, Hillary Clinton will bring in her "experts," subjugate parental authority and children will become political entities. More to the point, they will be Hillary Clinton's political entities. It is her plan to wield more power through the well-disguised veil of advocating for children. Her ultimate plan, however, is to create a utopian society that is socialist in philosophy and dependent upon the government for survival-- a society dependent upon Hillary Clinton.
   
   Barbara Olson gave solid proof to my instinct that the election of Hillary Clinton as President of the United States will be an unmitigated disaster for the people of the United States who treasure freedom and security. Barbara Olson is no longer with us because she was one of the victims of the September 11 disaster. Ironically, Bill Clinton chose to let Bin Laden slip away in 1996, and his "dumbing down" of the military gave gave Bin Laden and a host of terrorists a wide-open playing field. September 11 was an accident waiting to happen, much of which can be directly attributed to decisions made and policies put in place during the Bill and Hillary Clinton co-Presidency.
   
   There are those who say that books such as Barbara Olson's are dredging up ancient history and that we need to move on. This country endured one of the most corrupt administrations in our history in the years of Bill and Hillary Clinton as co-Presidents. To those who think this is trivial or a re-hashing of old scandals, I offer only one thing to consider: Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

5 comments about House of Abraham: Lincoln and the Todds, A Family Divided by War.

1. Why did the majority of the Todds choose the South over the North? Their's was a border state that stayed in the Union. They owned too few slaves to have fortunes staked on the system. On p. 174 Berry defines the Todds as being "shrill with hatred... collapsed in self interest and grief". What drove them to this?
   
   Are they really "a once happy family" as Berry says? The litigation over their father's estate belies this. The litigation not only left their father's second wife (mother of 6?) dependent, but also disinherited those, like Mary, who had already had gifts from the father. Did early favoritism cause the rift as much as the war?
   
   Lincoln appears to be the model brother-in-law. Risking charges of favoritism and nepotism, Lincoln helps his Union oriented brothers-in-law (who also married Todds), giving one the ability to contract for provisions (which he exploits and when challenged threatens blackmail) and another a coveted army position away from the fray in the west. He entertains a Confederate Todd in the White House, and provides a pardon for another who will not take an oath of allegiance to the country that pardons her. His tolerance and charity towards his family recalls his tolerance of McClellan and a host of cabinet officers of similarly dubious motives.
   
   Mary personalizes the Confederate allegiance in her family as a fight against her. Maybe Mary was close to being right. Some seem to bask in the status of being able to malign a relative. Others just expect too much which can breed disappointment even under normal conditions. Maybe some of their intensity was a family rebellion against the one grown up who, by chance, had married into their family.
   
   While the book is short, it is not entirely focused. For a book on the family, too many of its precious paragraphs are devoted to sketching the war such as the battles of Manassas and Shiloh and the seige of Vicksburg. I would have liked a reference table in the beginning showing the birth order of the Todds and their marriages. Most importantly it needs some discussion on why the Todds did what they did.
   
   In a lighthearted afterward the author describes his research. While a lot went into this effort, I hope it is not thorough, because I would like to know more of these Todds.



2. Their have been some good Civil War family biographies lately. The Whalen's book on the Fighting McCook's and this book on the Todd family come to mind. Family biographies can help us understand the human cost of the Civil War as no other histories can. As family members die, we understand the war's causalities in very personal terms gaining an idea of what this costs those involved.
   
   The McCook family had no conflicted loyalties, no question of who to fight for nor any hesitations in committing to a side. They were able to establish a record of service fighting for the Union that was unique. The Todd family had conflicted loyalties, questions on who to fight for and hesitated in committing to a side. A large slave owning family from Kentucky with an in-law in the White House would cause problems for everyone. Lincoln, his wife, her brothers & sisters their spouses created a series of confrontations, personal and political problems that make up this story.
   
   The author introduces the Todd family and the principle people giving us a solid foundation for the story. Lincoln tries to keep as much of the family on the Union side as possible. His efforts delay some members "going South" and produce some real political problems in 1861 for him. Each year of the war is a chapter. This allows us to follow everyone from assignment to assignment or battle to battle. Against this backdrop, Lincoln's personal life and family problems becomes worse and worse. Each newspaper story, each battle death adds to Lincoln's problems and Mary's woes. However, at Springfield as Lincoln is buried, the Todd in-laws stand as family.
   
   The author is easy to read and manages to keep all the story lines together. These are not likable people and he clearly does not like them. This come through in a number of places and may have colored the story. In addition, the author makes misstatements about the battle of Shiloh and the POW exchange. None of his mistakes are major but he is accepting of popular stories as opposed to good scholarship. A nice touch is to take each person from 1865 to his or her death. This is always something I look for in this type of book and feel is really important. The author does an excellent job on each person giving the reader a feel for who they were.
   
   Overall, this is a very readable book. The people are well drawn allowing us to see their world and have some understanding of their choices. In addition, the author shows how the divisions in Lincoln's personal family helped him reach out to the national family as reflected in many of his speeches.



3. This is an entirely new perspective of the Lincoln family, specifically that of his wife's. While there is much known about Abraham Lincoln's wife, Mary Todd Lincoln, as well as their oldest son, Robert Todd Lincoln, who was the only child to live to a ripe old age, I know very little about the Todd Family, and was especially intrigued that a book had finally been written on this little known side of the Lincoln family. Although the book was short, and, as admitted by the author, only a cursory story of several of the members of the Todd family could be done, it was admittedly an interesting book and whetted my appetite for additional information on the Todd Family. I found that the book added a few more pieces to the complex character and personality of Abraham Lincoln the man, and found further that his "melancholia" that is so much discussed was not solely due to the failures of many of his generals, the exorbitant loss of life in the battles of the conflict, the political intrigues of the Radical Republicans and the Democratic-Copperheads, but also partly due to the inner family turmoil that he and Mary experienced with their own family, specifically the Todds. Truly, Abraham Lincoln was quite prophetic when he said that a "House divided against itself cannot stand", and surely this could be said of the Todd family who themselves were divided with several family members serving in the armed forces of the Confederacy and the Union, several killed in battle, and one assassinated. I would recommend this book, and hope to see further detailed studies of the Todd Family in the future.



4. Stephen Berry's work House of Abraham: Lincoln and the Todds, A Family Divided by War is a wonderful addition to the field of Lincoln historiography. His work is very insightful to the machinations of the Todd family. The Todd's were truly a family divided by the Civil War and its aftermath. The work is well written and researched throughly by the author. Lincoln's extended family, i.e. the Todd's were surely an embarassment for the president and his wife. However, even though many of the Todd's were confederate sympathizers, Lincoln always was supportive of his wife's sisters. This is a fine work on Lincoln and essential for Lincolnites to read.



5. Abraham Lincoln is one of the most-written about men in the English language. As a long-time Lincoln-buff, I don't mind that there are so many books, but I have to admit, I occasionally wonder if we've reached diminishing returns. A lot of Lincoln books are what I'd call "old wine in new bottles."
   
   But House of Abraham really is that rare thing: a truly new and important perspective on Abraham Lincoln. Having read most of what there is on Abraham and Mary, let me just say what I think is new here: First, the author fleshes out the Southern wing of the Todd family for the first time. These are some seriously colorful characters: David Todd was arrested for desecrating corpses in a Richmond jail; Samuel Todd and Alex Todd were Confederate soldiers killed in action; George Todd abused African-American prisoners who had been taken while storming Battery Wagner; Emilie Todd, widow of a Confederate Brigadier, spent a week in the White House, despite the scandal; Margaret Todd smuggled contraband through Union lines, on and on. In all my reading I'd never known any of this.
   
   Second, the author connects these scandals to Mary's growing unpopularity in Washington. Many books have mentioned that Mary lost three half-brothers on the rebel side (the author proves that it was only two), but none have demonstrated so clearly why her family-ties became such a problem.
   
   Finally, while House of Abraham begins as a book about the Todds, it becomes more and more a meditation on family, on the nation as a family, and on Lincoln's evolving understanding of the War. Ultimately, the author convinced me that Lincoln saw the Todds as a microcosm of the nation and that he understood the war as a "mosaic of family crises."
   
   As some of the other reviewers have pointed out, the book isn't very long, but considering it limits itself to saying something actually new about the most-written-about-man-in-America, I don't think that's surprising. Team of Rivals (which I loved) was 900 pages, but not that much of it was new. It was really the framing that was so impressive. In fact, I'd recommend reading Team of Rivals and then House of Abraham in succession. They make a terrific pair.

5 comments about My Life.

1. When faced with impeachment after Monica rumor became The Story, President Clinton, to whom ambiguity was never part of his nature, took the worst situation to mean retreat from Office, which would not have relieved his soul.
   This autobiography is informative and tender in every corner. At times the ex-President aggravated his bitterness and despair; not a pleasing prospect for a vigorous man with an appetite for distinction. His excessive passions, one for his wife and the other for his daughter, at the end of the day had caused Miss Lewinski and partners to be removed from the White House. I believe the young lady was also a victim of irrational exuberance (Excuse me Mr. Greenspan)
   At times there is always some sort of melancholy demeanor than can grow daily more somber in high offices. President Clinton is telling us he could not possibly have been entirely impervious to the mounting evidence against him, such signs were motivated by political reasons from rival factions with nefarious ends - to hurt the Democrats from within.
   
   Clinton, once known for his vivacity, was now showing the strain of the shameful events.
   
   Clinton, the deep-rooted optimist who found it temperamentally difficult to resign from trouble, has had his face already sagging with worry as daily attacks compounded his sense of doom...
   
   At 55 he left office with a 65% approval rating. (One of the highest after WWII)
   However, the charismatic President looked a narrow-chest man with the face of a person much older in age. That did not at all resemble him nine years ago when he took that Office.



2. A long and interesting read, overly detailed on fairly mundane aspects of his life and unsurprisingly brief on more interesting times.
   
   Nevertheless, an engrossing read. Who knows where his road will end.



3. Clinton supporter or not, you will find this biography to be fascinating. Clinton gives you the works, from his childhood all the way through his Presidency. If you're looking for lurid details, he doesn't give them. What he does give you is a chance to see how he saw things. What I found especially interesting were the stories about the fight over controversial issues with Congress and the long Whitewater investigation. This book is VERY long and is anecdotal, so be prepared to read a thousand short stories, with little or no overarching theme other than "this is how it happened".



4. Undoubtly Bill Clinton will be remembered as one of the most influential presidents of the US. Politically he was a moderate as opposed to a liberal as seen in different policies he pushed forward. He was a savvy president too in terms of his political skills. The government shutdown, I believe, was one of his greatest moves in this sense. The 1996 victory was the corollary of the latter, besides the fact that Bob Dole was not a strong opponent. Clinton would have won anyways.
   A lot of lessons to be learned from Clinton's book. However, certain parts of it are too detailed.



5. I am not a fan of President Bill Clinton, but to read his life and how he started from nothing to be President in the Oval Office shows that every American can fulfill your dreams if you dream big. President Clinton shares valuable insight into his life from childhood to his political years. Every time I walked into a bookstore I would pick up and book and look through it. I finally decide to give it a read, and I found out that I could not lay it down.
   
   My biggest qualm with President Clinton is his wishy washy stand on life. You cannot believe to be pro-life, but believe to be pro-choice at the same time. It makes no sense. I am a Roman Catholic who is 100% PRO LIFE and I make no apologies. Life needs to be protected from conception to natural death. The respect for life has been lost since Roe vs. Wade.
   
   President Clinton did accomplish wonderful things during his presidency, and sad to say he did better things for the American people than some of our Republicans in Washington.
   I am glad I took the time to read this book. We hear a lot of jokes with his infidelity, and he admits his wrong and hurtful actions. But did Jesus not say, "He that is with out sin cast the first stone?"
   
   We are use to hearing the term, "Slick Willie." But I believe that Bill Clinton honestly opened his mind and heart to the American people and told his story, and I am glad to have a better insight into his life. Being the President of the greatest country of the world is no easy job.

4 comments about With Honor: Melvin Laird in War, Peace, and Politics.

1. I grew up in the late 60s and early 70s thinking of bullet-headed Melvin R. Laird as a warmonger who helped perpetuate America's anguish in Vietnam. I was astonished to discover just how wrong I (and many of my friends, as well as much of the press at the time) really were. Though the account is fascinating of how Laird, despite resistance from both Nixon and Kissinger, was actually working hard but finally successfully to get us out of Vietnam, I found the book more valuable for a different reason.
   
   Anyone who objectively reads "With Honor" will learn at least one thing: That it is (or at least once was) possible for Republicans and Democrats to work together and actually realize important goals for our nation and the world. What they accomplished through their efforts, with the integral help of Laird's talent for behind-the-scenes leadership, is nothing short of inspiring. It is a shame that Laird and his Republican allies, together with the Democrats they befriended, aren't working together again, just as this book shows they once did, to salve and solve some of the wounds our nation has endured of late.
   
   But "With Honor" is not just a history lesson that shows us "what could have been," had we true leaders like Melvin Laird and his friends working together again today. Finely written and easily accessible, "With Honor" accomplishes something political biographies often fail at: It manages at once to be a smooth, pleasurable, and entertaining read, yet at the same time sacrifices none of the details, facts, and stories that make this account so rich. And, as the best biographies usually are, the book is chock full of never-before-told anecdotes and facts -- some scandalous, some uplifting, but all interesting. Surprisingly, there is even quite a lot of humor (The story of the smoldering cigar in Laird's suit pocket at the Vatican is worth the purchase price alone!)
   
   Even people not normally interested in politics will find this book both entertaining and compelling -- not to mention hugely educational in the way of showing just how dicey was the birthing of many of the most important institutions of 20th Century America -- hinging as they did on a few key people with their hearts in the right place, working together for the good of all. There are real lessons today's politicians could learn from Mel Laird. Recommend they read it today!



2. This biography of Melvin Laird was written in a style that makes one not want to put the book down. For anyone who lived through the turbulent 1960's and or are veterans of the Vietnam War, this book is a must read to clearly understand the politics and actions of our government during that period. For others, the story of Melvin Laird is an inspiring history lesson of a dedicated and influential elected official and Secretary of Defense that gives the reader insight into the Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon presidential policies and decisions. Having read most of the self serving memoirs of the top players of the 1960's, I thought this book was the most balanced view of the major political and military decisions of that time in our history.



3. WITH HONOR...MELVIN LAIRD IN WAR, PEACE, AND POLITICS...Dale Van Atta
   There are three story lines in this authorized biography. The most prominent and both best and least known is getting out of Vietnam. It is surprisingly timely as Laird's warning to Bush Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld--"It's a helluva lot easier to get into a war than it is to get out one"--plays out in 2008 headlines. The almost eerie coincidence is that the Laird book was released the week that the generals were telling Congress that they needed more troops and more time. According to this book Laird [who removed General Westmoreland who asked him to "send me 500,000 more men" as Vietnam commander] would have (a) done the testifying himself and (b) would have asked "Did you expect the military to ask for fewer troops and less time? "
   During his entire four years as Nixon's Secretary of Defense Laird was if not the sole the most prominent advocate of what came to be known as "Vietnamization," his plan to disengage from that ill conceived and unfortunate military adventure. Everyone else in the administration was either opposed to or ambivalent about "getting the hell out" in Laird's words. President Nixon was alternatively both of the above, and Henry Kissinger, his main adviser on foreign policy wanted a peace treaty first, which put him more in the Nixon camp than on the Laird bandwagon.
   One of the most cogent quotes from the book was Laird's advice to the military, the White House, and anyone else who would listen that "time has run out."
   When President Bush invited all the living ex-secretaries of defense to a show and tell session at the White House it quickly became obvious that his administration which had unanimously been, in Laird's view, "bent on war" was really looking for affirmation not advice.
   One of the questions the book answers is how Laird got away with something verging on insubordination that no other Secretary of Defense has even attempted. Forty years later it is easy to say "because he was right," but that wasn't evident then and there are some who will argue the point even now. The real reason is that Nixon needed Laird more than Laird needed Nixon. This was obvious at the outset when Nixon gave him a free hand [in writing, on a napkin] to make all the "presidential" appointments in the Pentagon to convince him to abandon the Congress, which he loved, for the most unpopular and difficult job in the government. It was confirmed continuously over the four years Laird served as Laird won every vote from the Congress that he asked for Defense and the administration.
   The second story in the book is the gossipy one about Laird's relations with Nixon and with Kissinger which will attract the attention of the gossip addicted. The non-stop one-upmanship encounters on matters large and small with Henry Kissinger are given extensive play in the book. What is underplayed is that the two remain great friends and mutual admirers. Their struggles were a kind of gamesmanship it seems even though they involved a very high stakes game.
   What will titillate is what the book has to say about Laird's relations with Nixon starting with the quote: "...sometimes orders that came at night were not good orders to follow" and the fact that Nixon lied to him about Watergate to get him to come to the White House and try to salvage a crumbling administration.
   
   He also told Nixon that he would get along with the Congress better if he didn't make them feel he was smarter than they were. "You can't get a vote if you start on a pedestal," he told him.
   What is most admirable about the book is the third story, the often too short descriptions of his accomplishments over an extraordinarily wide range and the very high regard in which he was held in many important places. What he really wanted was something he never got and something he gave up when he took the job at Defense. He wanted to be Speaker of the House of Representatives. His name did show up on several short lists for jobs he neither sought nor wanted. He was regarded as a possible candidate for president or vice president. He might have been commissioner of baseball, and could have been chief executive of a large assortment of large, important corporations. The author does not say why he didn't pursue any of these. He was 50 when he left the Defense Department in 1972. My own observation was that he had aged 20 years in the time he was in that job. I was told that will happen when for 4 years every time the phone rings, it's bad news.
   The dichotomy is that when you consider what he did before, during, and after his stint in Defense, perhaps we lost more than we gained because of this important and perhaps indispensable diversion. We could, after all, be almost halfway to our 100 years in Vietnam but for Mel Laird.
   But still.
   Laird and his great friend and ally Rhode Island's Democratic Representative John Fogarty on the Health subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee can single-or double-handedly be credited for making the National Institutes of Health and Center for Disease Control into major institutions. They were also responsible for creating 13 "Lairdettes" on campuses across the country including the McArdle Center at UW-Madison to do cancer research. They did all of this over the dead bodies of notable fiscal conservatives in the Congress and the White House including President Eisenhower.
   Eisenhower, as well as his two immediate successors John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, named Laird the US representative to the annual conferences of the World Health Organization.
   His unprecedented base closing record while at Defense, incidentally, indicates he didn't abandon his own fiscally conservative roots altogether.
   He introduced Nixon to the Wisconsin concept of revenue sharing whose initiatives gave that idea a short and not so sweet run at the federal level.
   Talent was at the head of his criterion list when recruiting for the Defense Department. Of the 68 top jobs there, a little over half were filled by Republicans, the rest by Democrats, Independents, and a few "unknowns" which may have been "unasked." This worthy idea was discarded by the Reagan administration and hasn't surfaced since.
   He put his most trusted recruit Bob Froehlke in charge of a reorganization of the several intelligence agencies whose reports he always regarded with something approaching suspicion. The project improved inter-agency communication and reduced costs, which was either hoped for was what they got.
   He was always open with the press and the public and told his staff that the way to deal with bad news is to expose it. When he left the Pentagon, the Washington press corps presented him with a football inscribed Laird 194 Press 0.
   He is responsible for the military's medical school which has supplied most of the doctors needed by our forces in times of trouble.
   He and Bob Froehlke took the lead on designing and promoting a post-Vietnam amnesty program for young people who eluded the draft.
   He ended the draft.
   New York's Democratic Governor Hugh Carey gave him credit for saving New York City from bankruptcy.
   He orchestrated the appointment of Gerald Ford to the vice presidency fully aware that Ford would soon be president, because Laird knew that Nixon had lied about his involvement in Watergate and could not survive the ensuing ongoing cover-up.
   The book doesn't make the claim, but it is hard not to believe that he also got President Ford to name Nelson Rockefeller to the vice presidency. So at one time in our country's history, the man from Marshfield had a major role in filling the two top jobs in the country.
   He and Senator Adlai Stevenson crafted a presidential nominating plan that would limit the number of primaries to 16 and give a more important role to something now known as "super delegates" which is further proof that the law of unintended consequences cannot be repealed.
   He and fellow Wisconsin Congressman John Byrnes worked with the National Football League to preserve their monopoly, distribute their soon to be riches democratically and evenly, and, not so incidentally, save the Green Bay Packers.
   His dogged demands for diversity were rewarded with the unprecedented promotions of large numbers of minorities and women to flag officer status in all branches of the military.
   What we will never know is where else Mel Laird would have gone or what else he would have done if events and pressing national needs had not altered his own best laid plans. What we do know is that he did what he did with, as the book's title claims, honor.
   



4. Well written and informative book covering the span of several presidencies. We have had the priviledge of getting to know Mr Secretary and have found him to be an intelliget, straight-forward man with an astuteness which has been recognized and prized as a valuable asset in defense strategic planning for our nation.

5 comments about Nixon and Kissinger: Partners in Power.

1. The relationship of these two incredibly insecure men is interesting to explore. Both were looking for constant reassurance from one another. Nixon seemed incredibly unsure of himself in Robert Dallek's book.
   
   Dallek explores other good biographies of Nixon and previously unreleased material to go in more depth.
   
   The problems faced by Nixon and Kissinger were varied, and handled with varied success. The failure in Vietnam sticks out like a sore thumb and is a major theme of the book. Smaller problems that they dealt with including Chile where the U.S. intervened to take a democratically elected leader out of power shed light on the deception and secretive measures used by the administration. The Nixon administration did more than stretch the rules...they broke many of them.
   
   Henry Kissinger appears as the hero of this book. Domestic issues are in the background of this book with Foreign policy as the star.



2. Robert Dallek, biographer of Presidents Kennedy and Johnson, has now written an account of the Nixon presidency, but it is not as good as Seymour Hersh's magnificent The Price of Power.
   
   In July 1968 Nixon and Kissinger told President Thieu of South Vietnam to reject US calls to begin participating in peace talks. In doing so, they broke the US law against private citizens conducting diplomatic negotiations.
   
   Nixon campaigned on a platform of ending the war, yet sabotaged Johnson's final efforts to negotiate, and then escalated the war. Nixon and Kissinger always opposed unilateral withdrawal. They aimed to continue the US aggression against Vietnam until victory could be achieved. When they talked of an `honourable settlement', they meant one that achieved all the USA's war aims. More US soldiers would have to die so that the earlier deaths would not have been in vain, which, absurdly, equates to saving the dead.
   
   Nixon and Kissinger cruelly indulged in sunshine talk about the war, promising the American people that one last push, one more invasion, would bring victory. But the truth was that the USA had lost. There was no alternative to withdrawal: their only choice was whether to end the war swiftly, or end it a bit later after killing yet more Vietnamese and having even more American soldiers killed pointlessly (20,000 were killed under Nixon).
   
   Nixon and Kissinger never grasped that a quick exit from Vietnam would have helped, not undermined, US credibility. They never asked other governments what they thought about a speedy exit. Détente was just a cynical device to try to divide Vietnam from its allies, and it failed.
   
   Dallek concludes that Nixon and Kissinger's policy towards Vietnam "was a disaster. Administration actions destabilized Cambodia, expended thousands of American, Vietnamese and Cambodian lives, gained no real advantage and divided the country." Actually, Nixon virtually united the country against him and against the war: by 1969, 71% of the American people wanted Nixon to withdraw 100,000 troops from Vietnam by the end of the year.
   
   Nixon and Kissinger claimed that their policies were realistic and intelligent, but neither could see that the Vietnamese people were justly fighting for their national liberation. Nixon and Kissinger were not the tragic, flawed heroes that Dallek portrays but despicable war criminals.



3. Dallek frames Nixon and Kissinger as a "cautionary tale that the country forgets at its peril." He sees both men as arrogant and self-serving. Additionally, it is Dallek's feeling that both men used each other for political purposes. The great foreign policy victories of the Nixon administration - opening of China, détente and the peace in the Vietnam War - are all merely political moves by both men to win elections and prove that they are the smartest people in the country. Yet, the worst comes during the Watergate crisis, where actual foreign policy decisions have to be made including the Yom Kippur War. Nixon is merely seen as a second hand player in these dramas, thwarting when not ignoring Kissinger. It was a dangerous time with little oversight from outside the White House that we should all remember least it not be repeated.
   
   This good analysis drives the book. However, Dallek has the annoying habit of calling Kissinger "Henry." Its not like I'm gonna get him confused with the other major characters called Kissinger. Secondly, the most important foreign policy event between VJ Day and the fall of the Berlin Wall is the end of the Bretton Woods system of fixed exchange rates - where the United States basically used a steady dollar to keep the world economy on an even keel. On August 15, 1971 Nixon ended the convertibility of dollars to gold by closing the gold window. Yet, if you only read this book you would never have known. I am aghast at such an omission.
   
   Despite these problems, the book is still a good read. It attempts to conquer the myth that while Nixon was a bad domestic executive he was still great in foreign policy. Read it together with All the President's Men and you'll never like Nixon again.



4. The book seems to have plenty of snippets of research from the latest from the Nixon Library and Henry K himself. But, as other reviewers have also noted, it doesn't add a lot of new analysis to Nixon, Kissenger, or Nixon-Kissenger bios. The book could have been trimmed 200 pages (and lost 20 pages of footnotes as well), and maybe bumped up a star. Or, Dallek could have done more actual work, expanded it another 100 pages and have a worthwhile in-depth study. Instead, we get neither. (For example, there's just a handful of pages about relations with NATO allies, including almost nothing on their take on SALT talks.)
   
   Beyond that, I have two historical analysis bones to pick, and one writing/copyeding one as well.
   
   First, on page 76, Dallek claims that successful fall 1968 Vietnam peace talks would have been unlikely to change the election. HUH?
   
   Given that Humphrey closed a double-digit percentage point gap in the final two weeks to the 0.7 percent of election day, that's a ludicrous argument. Heck, if LBJ had called the bombing halt on, say, Oct. 28 instead of Oct. 31, and gotten one more shred of "movement" from Hanoi before election day, HHH would have beaten Nixon.
   
   Second, on page 511, Dallek claims that Chilean socialist president Salvador Allende would have been overthrown by his own ineptness even had Nixon/Kissenger not supported coup elements in various ways. For Dallek to say this without taking into account US economic pressure, or ITT meddling, is equally ludicrous to what he said about the 1968 election.
   
   Finally, on the copyediting/writing side. Throughout the book, "State Department" is lower-cased as "state department," while "summit" and "junta," among other words, are consistently capitalized. This is not per Chicago style (at least not when I worked as a book publisher). I'm guessing it's some idiosyncrasy of Dallek's.
   
   I had thought about three-starring this, but, what I said above, plus how I was able to skim this book so much, showing its amount of fluff, made me move it down a star.



5. I liked this book. It gave a real inside view of two extremely complicated and powerful men. I came away not especially liking either one. Yet one could, to some extent, feel some sympathy for each. It takes a good writer to be able to illicit that in the reader. Dallek is a fine writer. You can trust what he pens. I recommend the book.

5 comments about Lincoln Unmasked: What You're Not Supposed to Know About Dishonest Abe.

1. Lincoln Unmasked: What You're Not Supposed to Know About Dishonest Abe
   
   Good readying if you like history and want to know when and where the downfall of our country began.



2. This is a historical polemic in that it attacks other historians and the official Lincon standards. There is no other way to present an alternative to accepted scholarship than to try to debunk it. I work in DC and pass the Lincoln Memorial frequently. It is a temple. It is the stone deification of a man, not unlike the Roman deification of Augustus. They did the same to Jefferson. It is a human tendency. No one will say it - but they are temples seeking public worship. Very odd, not just today, but when built. The US has no state religion. That is the first amendment - but we do. One is the Lincoln religion. Lincoln's actual feelings about slavery, racial equality and the nature of total war have been glossed over in favor of the temple. All historians know it. Some of the contents of this book are rather shocking. Extensive footnotes. Your kids will probably get in trouble if they take this to public schools where the temple is strong. I recommend the book as one of many about Lincoln, but mostly because it will cause you to rethink Lincoln, read more about Lincoln and come to a decision on your own - which may disagree with the author. You may end up accepting the temple theory, but Lincoln should be reconsidered rather than just worshipped. This is one of those think-for-yourself books that gives you some concepts to reconsider. Personally, I don't think it goes far enough as I have studied Lincoln for years and am amazed at the amount of material the general public does not know. Why the civil rightds movement associates with the Lincoln temple and not with Harper's Ferry is beyond me. Also read up on John Brown, Harper's Ferry and Lincoln's plans for life after the presidency. But I give this book five stars for its daring, brevity, footnotes and polemical style that makes for lively reading. As for the temple, I would rather see a copy of the magna carta, the constitution and a large, running mirror where people saw themselves and their personal responsibility. Lincoln's statute reminds me of the descriptions of Jupiter Optimus in his temple in anceint Rome. One day, people will claim miracles...



3. Overall, this book is exciting and fast paced. I received my Ph.D in American History at Georgetown and I thought his account of Abe was spot on. This book repeats at time but Thomas Dilorenzo makes up for it in posterity and style. This book should be required at every school! I enjoyed it so much I read the rest of his books the same week. 5 Stars



4. Lincoln Unmasked: What You're Not Supposed to Know About Dishonest Abe
   
   If you are a teacher of history and include critical thinking as a part of your curriculumn, then this is the book for you and your students. Learning how to think critically through the use of history involves determining the legitmacy of historical evidence and how an author's bias can effect the interpretation of that evidence. "Lincoln Unmasked" by Thomas Dilorenzo is an excellent example of how evidence can be misused, because of the author's bias, to create a misinterpretation of history that only a propagandist with the staure of, say, Joesph Goebbels could be proud. And of course if Jefferson Davis were alive today he would be the first to give it " a two thumbs up" and consider it a validation of his own tome to the Civil War. Sorry, Mr. Dilorenzo I meant "The War Between the States" or better yet "The War of Northern Agression".
   I dare you to find a revisionist history of the Civil War other than "Lincoln Unmasked" that does a better job of minimizing if not elimating slavery as a key issue. My hat's off to Mr. DiLorenzo, no book has ever done a better job of teaching my students how careful one must be and how important it is, in a democracy, to ensure that the evidence used and interpretated by our leaders is actually true.



5. It's beginning to be a tiresome and totally predictable reaction of the Lincoln cultists that DiLorenzo exposes to attack the author personally rather than the documented material from the historical record that he uses to make his case. "Screed" is a word they use to attack Dr. DiLorenzo personally and by doing so have defined and unmasked their own emotionally based prejudices and their own innate bigotry. "Screed" is a good word to describe the "DiLorenzo Haters" own irrational outbursts and to keep reciting the mythical and holy Lincoln mantra, created after his death, to attempt to shout down anyone who would differ in the orthodox opinion with the modern day Josef Goebbels-like sanitizing of real history as Dr. DiLorenzo is offering as an alternative and well as a well documented debunking of the Lincoln Myth. The charge of excessive "copy/paste" type of documention actually gives his work more validity than just being a personal statement of his opinion. Dr. DiLorenzo knew very well of the coming withering attacks from the very "Cultists" he has exposed and documented accordingly.

5 comments about Rogue Warrior.

1. This book is an exciting roller coaster ride throught the life of Marcinko. It was hard to put down.
   
   I'm amazed that Marcinko as able to reach the rank and levels of authority he did. He was truly a "rogue" warrior. Amazing man, but clearly one who operated outside the norms of the military.
   
   My only exposure to SEALs was during 3 weeks of Airborne training over 25 years ago. A team was in my class and in many ways they fit the image portrayed in this book. They were extremely close knit non-conformist who could do so many push-ups that the drill sergeants (black hats) had to take turns yelling at them because their voices would go out before they even broke a sweat.
   
   To paraphrase a familiar quote - these are the "rough men" who allow us to sleep soundly in our beds because they are ready to visit violence on those who would do us harm.



2. I really enjoyed this book Marcinko was one of the last of a dying breed in the military. I have spent most of my adult life in the armed forces and can definitely relate. Oddly enough his story ring true when now more then ever our military is so riddled with political correctness and politics you can't even do your job.



3. An old pants crapping hippy from the 60s will probably tell you about tripping on LSD for the first time, well Richard Marcinko tripped on Cobra venom in Cambodia. Yes he eats an entire Cobra piece by piece, eats the venom sacs and starts seeing bizarre checkerboard patterns in black n white.
   Wearing tire tread sandals on his feet dressed in black gym shorts Marcinko hunts down VC, shoots, dismembers, blows away and cusses out anyone in his path. Inbetween that he drinks a lot and screws a ton of women.
   
   This book rules, thats about all I can say. I read it in a day, passed it to some friends who also finished in one day. A classic, if you have any desire to check it out, check it out, its like used for 1 cent.



4. For those looking for info or accounts of escapades and adventures a la The Unit, look no further. Richard Marcinko lived the life, lead the life, and ultimately had to deal with that life. From it all he is able to capture an image and accurately convey this to us, and to it is a style all his own.
   
   Right from the first page you are drawn into Marcinko's life and you want to cheer for him. He is fighting for our country and protecting us. Of course there is the gruesome side of the necessity of killing, of the almost joy of killing that underlies Marcinko's writing, not only within himself but within his fellow Seals as well. Alas, to those not in the field this may be hard to understand, but putting yourself in their shoes with enemies all around you, the only course of action is to shoot to kill, and who better to have do this than those that live on that thrill? Gruesome? Yes. Necessary? Yes, in real life and in Marcinko's writing of his life.
   
   We follow him from when he was a Frogman to joining the Seals and going to Vietnam. His personality is very strong and this flared to life in Vietnam and ultimately started his move up the ranks. Then there is the creation of Seal Team Six, which to the laymen is only fathomable on the television, so to hear Marcinko describe what he and his men were up to was absolutely fascinating. Further on his deployment to test the nation's most "secure" facilities... This was a hoot and I loved reading about this. Granted, I don't want to see that our tax paid facilities are as vulnerable as they were, but I would rather have our experts discover these flaws than some other bad guy.
   
   All in all, a great read. We are able to see Marcinko's life with a flare of writing to accurately convey his personality. I would recommend this to anyone.
   
   5 stars.



5. A couple parts seemed like a stretch, but it was still a great book. I read the whole thing in two sittings, It was just too interesting to put down.

5 comments about Beyond the White House: Waging Peace, Fighting Disease, Building Hope.

1. Pulitzer Prize winner and former President Jimmy Carter presents his memoir/retrospective on twenty-five years of humanitarian work in Beyond the White House: Waging Peace, Fighting Disease, Building Hope, now available in an unabridged audiobook on CD with tracks every three minutes for easy bookmarking. Narrated by Tom Stechschulte and Barbara Caruso, Beyond the White House tells of Carter's travels to distant, often war-torn lands from Haiti to Ethiopia on missions of peacekeeping, as well as his efforts to combat disease. Though told in Carter's plain-spoken, folksy manner, Beyond the White House not only illuminates his world-spanning efforts to do good, but also challenges the listener to think and act in ways that promote responsible worldwide social ethics. Highly recommended. 7 CDs, 7 3/4 hours.



2. Beyond the White House is a book written by former U.S. President Jimmy Carter and it covers his political, social, and humanitarian activities since he left the White House early in 1981. Carter has achieved much in his days since leaving Washington D.C. and he seems anxious to share his accomplishments with the reader. Through his Carter Center, the former president, his wife Rosalynn, and their team of associates at the center have labored long hours, traveled around the world, and met with dozens of foreign leaders to work out agreements, wipe out disease, and improve political freedom.
   
   Most people already know about Jimmy Carter's humanitarian works and his efforts to improve the world around him. But some may not be aware of the actual events that have transpired while working toward these goals. Carter explains some of them in detail, and in some instances, he takes the details a bit too far. This is especially true in the book's opening chapters when Carter is discussing his meetings with government leaders of different countries. When I started to read this part of the book, I was expecting something written in a manner similar to a personal memoir. Instead, these opening chapters read like a play- by- play excerpt from a diary. I was expecting a quick overview of the meetings and what was achieved, but Carter felt the need to give the rundown on what happened each day and at different times throughout the day. A quick summary would have been sufficient.
   
   In the second half of the book, however, Carter settles down and starts to talk about some of his important humanitarian achievements. I particularly liked the chapter on fighting disease. I was fully aware of Carter's work with Habitat for Humanity and I knew that he and his wife Rosalynn Carter were active in working toward a disease- free world. But I did not know exactly what diseases were high on their list and what level of success they had achieved. This chapter explains it all, and it includes some graphic photographs of individuals inflicted with certain preventable diseases. Carter explains in this chapter how he and his associates at the Carter Center have worked with the native people of different African nations and have helped them eliminate many diseases simply by encouraging cleanliness and by advocating filtering water before drinking.
   
   The chapter titled "Building Hope" is another good chapter because it includes some of Carter's work on human rights. I would have preferred that this chapter be a little longer, but it still gets the point across. Carter is very concerned about political freedom and he has worked long and hard to spread democracy and basic human rights around the world. I also liked that he included a section on his work in his home state of Georgia; specifically, in the city of Atlanta, to improve living conditions among the city's poor.
   
   Beyond the White House isn't a political book in the usual sense. Carter voices a few concerns about the human rights violations that have taken place under George W. Bush's watch and he points out the positive working relationship he has enjoyed with Gerald Ford, George H.W. Bush, and others. But other than that, he steers clear of political criticisms and differences in this book. He wanted this to be a book about the accomplishments of the Carter Center and he wanted to inspire everyone to work toward change for the betterment of humans around the world. For the most part, this book generally succeeds in these endeavors.
   
   Overall, Beyond the White House is a good book about Jimmy Carter's work as an ex- president and it details the many accomplishments of the Carter Center in its efforts to spread democracy, eliminate disease, and encouraging improvements in human rights. The first part of the book is a little more detailed than it needed to be, and some of the other chapters could use a little more length. But the book is still good overall and it presents a nice summary of what a person can achieve to improve the world around them. Carter had his share of difficulties as president, but his days since leaving the White House have been filled with achievement, and his life is a good example of the good that people can do in the later stages of their lives.



3. What this man has done post presidency is simply amazing. Pres. Carter writes in a simple unassumming style while telling these incredible stories of things he has been involved in since he left office, like eradicating terrible diseases and monitoring elections. A really interesting read..



4. Jimmy Carter's effectiveness as president will be long debated, as will the presidencies of most of the people who have held that office but despite some criticism from the extreme right his post presidential career has won the hearts of most Americans. From the fact that he went back home to his modest Georgia house to the work of the Carter Center to the fact that anyone can go and meet him on most Sundays as he teaches Sunday School at his home church, Jimmy Carter has become the very image of how many people think former presidents should spend their post presidential career.
   
   This book deals almost exclusively with one aspect of Carter's life after the White House and that is the work of the Carter Center. There are numerous very poignant moments described in this book as the former president and first lady travel to many of the most desolate areas of the world seeking to help improve the lives of the people who live there. There is also humor to be found such as the predicament that the first board of directors of the Carter Center found themselves in while trying to figure out how to phrase the by-laws to deal with the governance of the Center after the death of the Carter's. For the most part though this is the very moving story of how the Carter Center has improved the lives of millions of people.
   
   One of the basic thrusts of the book is that because he is an ex-president Jimmy Carter can gain the corporation of third world governments that otherwise would probably not allow these foreigners to work so openly in their countries. There are also diplomatic missions that the Center undertakes and they are well known as election monitors but it is their work fighting and in some cases eliminating disease that is the most impressive and that is the centerpiece of this book. The work of the Center with agriculture is barely mentioned but their success there would likely fill another book all on its own. Also notable is Carter's willingness to give credit for these achievements to others and not to even take all of the credit that is due to he and his wife.
   
   The biggest problem with this book is that a lot of the information found here can be found in President Carter's previous books and so I found that a good bit of the material here seemed pretty repetitive. There is a lot of information that I haven't run across before but in places I did feel like I was rereading a book that I had read before. In all fairness though I can't help but feel that this book was intended to raise public awareness of the Carter Center and its work and to therefore help with fundraising especially in a future that at some point will not include the fundraising powers of a former president. President Carter has become a very skilled author and as usual the writing was excellent and I thoroughly enjoyed the book, even the repetitive parts.



5. To do good works despite the stigma of the U. S. Government is a wish many of us share, and this book shows it can be done. Jimmy Carter is almost embarrassingly present on every page of this book, in the most oppressed, downtrodden and deprived corners of the world. It is not ego, but the ability to use the stature as a former president, that puts Jimmy Carter on these pages. As the author, he credits hundreds of others for their contributions to world peace, health, and improvement. Reluctantly he includes himself, and joyfully he adds Rosalynn, as the catalyst to uplifting change in the realms of politics, health, oppression, and human-caused tragedy around the world.
   In an encyclopedia or almanac format, short essays understate the enormous changes brought about by the ability to move important people to action on behalf of some of the most powerless. Beginning with election monitoring, and with a major portion on eliminating debilitating "forgotten diseases" that infect millions, he concludes with a vision for continuing this kind of work for the next 25 years.
   It becomes obvious that this book is not about Jimmy Carter, or the Carter Center, but about what change is possible. It is a challenge to the best in all of us to follow the example of the plain-spoken nuclear physicist from Plains to do what we can to improve the world. Don't give up; despite massive obstacles from powerful people, bringing the best of each human forward can still bring us all to a better world.
   You can read this as a biography, or as a promotion of the Carter Center, but at the end the possibility of positive change is the torch carried forward by this book.

No comments about An American Family: The Buckleys.