Governments

This photographic essay has something for everyone. It covers 20 years in the White House from a very special point of view. Diana Walker with a camera in hand had access to moments in history that no one else has had. She has captured our Presidents in serious and funny situations and all the moods in between. Her descriptions are well worth reading and make this very special "coffee table" book all the more important in its place in history. I highly recommend buying this book and it makes a great present.

Diana Walker not only captures timeless moments in history, but through her comments and those of the former presidents and first ladies, gives you an inside view to the workings of the world's most powerful office. A must buy!

DIANA WALKER BOOK IS GREAT SHE RECORDS THE PRESIDENTS SHE PHOTOGRAPHED FOR TIME FROM GERALD FORD TO WILLIAM CLINTON.

EVERY AMERICAN WHO IS LOVES THE PRESIDENCY LIKE I DO THEN THIS BOOK IS A MUST.

THANK YOU FOR THE BOOK DIANA.

I will go ahead and tell you this is not a review on the book. If I wrote a review on the book it would be positive anyway because of how I feel about Trey Ragsdale. I am a slow reader and read everything I can on my own feild of asset management and financial planning.

Anyway, Trey Ragsdale is a first rate citizen. He really enjoys politics and lives it out in his own life. He has a strong family heritage in politics, dating all the way back to James Ogelthorpe. So he is qualified to write this book. His friend Joe put his life on the line for the US in war.

All I can say is that I have learned alot from watching Trey Ragsdale think from another person's perspective and effectively build relationships with people that way. I'm sure this book, which I did buy, is an excellent one because the authors are excellent people.

I believe this book is great. It has all the important documents and things you might need for research or just for reading. I liked the facts about each President, the introduction, and how each inaugural address was included. My favorite section had to be about the Electoral College because Urban and Ragsdale explained it very well, regardless of your prior political knowledge.

I really think more people should read PurePolitics: The Foundations of Our Nation. If you don't think it sounds that great in my description, that is because you just haven't read it yet!

This book is a must read for all political pros. It is well organized and captures the key documents every American should know. As a political scientist, I use this readily available book as a reference when I am involved in any substantial political debate.
I highly recommend this book!

For nearly 30 years I have carried this book with me virtually everywhere. No, it's not "an easy read" - but it is worth buying (owning)and treasuring - if only for the FOURTH LETTER (to a German Friend)- it is the most moving argument/declaration for humanity and choosing it that I have ever seen anywhere.

Some (like Sartre?) might call it a "rationalization". But even those who have resigned themselves to the religions of cynicism and despair - could find a remnant of fight and even "goodness" (yikes!) inside themselves. Camus' words remind us that resignation and the inevitable indifference and inhumanity that follow are the ultimate betrayals of life.

While there is nothing "cheerful" or even optimistic about these writings - you'd have to be cold-blooded, heartless and completely beyond repair or redemption not to be inspired by the wistful aspirations that Camus exudes from his admittedly battered heart and soul.

I disagree with the reviewer (who did praise this precious book) Sartre is smart - but so is Camus - and Camus exudes the humanity that Sartre can't even see or imagine.

Sartre would tell us that we always have the freedom to at least rattle our chains (at least theoretically) - but Camus has the power to inspire us to want to.

"I step onto the podium only when forced to by the pressure of circumstances and by my conception of my function as a writer." (p. 132) From the circumstances of Fascist Spain and Nazi occupied France, to the circumstances of the Hungarian and Algerian struggles for freedom, Camus' essays demand involvement, require action in the face of hopelessness. He never offers a moment's peace for couch-potato complacency. "Freedom is not made up principally of privileges; it is made up especially of duties." (p. 96)

To read these essays is to step into the world of a man who said to Christians "I share with you the same revulsion from evil. But I do not share your hope, and I continue to struggle against this universe in which children suffer and die." (p. 71) And "Perhaps we cannot prevent this world from being a world in which children are tortured. But we can reduce the number of tortured children." (p. 73)

Camus is recalled to the podium, in a day when children are tortured and die in Chiapas while most turn a blind eye and complain that sitcoms just aren't what they used to be. These essays, possibly his most accessible work, demand an active response from the modern reader. Our struggle today, although not against Nazi minions, still must echo his "There are means that cannot be excused. I should like to be able to love my country and still love justice." (p. 5) [See Jamal's Live from Death Row and Peltier's Prison Writings, elsewhere on Amazon.]

Camus is outspoken about capital punishment, too. "It is obviously no less repulsive than the crime, and this new murder, far from making amends for the harm done to the social body, adds a new blot to the first one." (p. 176) His "Reflections on the Guillotine" is the longest essay in book. He views capital punishment, even in "free" societies, as an act of totalitarianism.

Camus proclaims the call to justice and the struggle for freedom found in the Old Testament, especially in the minor prophets. But he does so in a modern context, where God is silent and man is the maker of his own destiny. Although he sees no messianic age, he proclims the hope that by continuous effort evil can be diminished and freedom and justice may become more prevalent.

Five stars for courage, five stars for clarity, five stars for consistency. After the abortion of democracy on December 9, 2000, every freedom and justice seeking American needs to read this book.

(If you would like to respond to this review, click on the "about me" link above & send me email. Thanks!)

Camus' essays are obviously more difficult to read than hisstories, and quite possibly more difficult to read than his philosophical investigations as well. Should they be read? Of course. In them, he speaks of similar topics (i.e. what to do in the face of absurditiy, human moral dilemmas, etc.) as he does in the other books, though in a more precise, more direct fashion. His views on the death penalty shaped my own almost completely.

What you get in this book are coherent arguments by a coherent, nuainced thinker. Is Sartre smarter than Camus? Camus knew enough to fear most -isms and -ologies where Sartre did not... (not that I recommend ignoring Sartre either! )

I recently had occasion to re-read James MacGregor Burns's marvelous Roosevelt: The Lion and the Fox and was deeply impressed by how well its has withstood the test of time. The early paperback edition of this book, which was originally published in 1956 and covers the period from 1882 until 1940, characterized it as the "first political biography of Franklin Delano Roosevelt," and it continues to be the authoritative study of Roosevelt's preparation for and then conduct of his first two terms as president, when domestic affairs demanded most of his attention. This remains a wonderful book about this country's greatest politician of the 20th century, and it also offers many penetrating insights into the American political system.

Burns's treatment of Roosevelt is comprehensive, "[treating] much of [Roosevelt's] personal as well as his public life, because a great politician's career remorselessly sucks everything into its vortex." Roosevelt was the only child of a member of the upstate New York landed gentry, and he could have led a life of leisure. Instead, he was sent to Groton School in Massachusetts, where the headmaster, according to Burns, "made much of his eagerness to educate his boys for political leadership." Roosevelt completed his formal education at Harvard College and Columbia University Law School. Burns writes that Roosevelt's first elective office, as a New York State Senator was a "political education," and he became a "Young Lion" in Albany. Roosevelt served as Assistant Secretary of the Navy in Washington, D.C., during World War I and was the candidate for Vice President on the Democrat Party's unsuccessful ticket in 1920. In 1921, Roosevelt was stricken with polio, and the crippling disease would have ended the public career of a less ambitious and determined man. Instead, he continued to work hard at politics, was elected Governor of New York in 1928 and then President in 1932. This was just the beginning of a remarkable career in high office.

Burns makes clear that Roosevelt was a progressive in the tradition of Woodrow Wilson but was without strong ideas or a specific agenda. According to Burns: "The presidency, Roosevelt said shortly after his election, 'is preeminently a place of moral leadership.'" Retired Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes offered this cutting assessment: "A second -class intellect, but a first-class temperament." Action to combat the depression was necessary to restore public confidence in government, and the first Hundred Days of Roosevelt's first term was one of the great periods of legislative achievement in American history. Burns writes: "Roosevelt was following no master program." However, in Burns's view: "The classic test of greatness in the White House has been the chief executive's capacity to lead Congress." According to that test, Roosevelt was a great president. Burns writes that, "[i]n his first two years in office Roosevelt achieved to a remarkable degree the exalted position of being President of all the people." Burns explains: "A remarkable aspect of the New Deal was the sweep and variety of the groups it helped."

As early as 1934, however, organized conservative opposition to the New Deal was forming. (A newspaper cartoon reprinted here shows a figure identified as the Republican Party holding a sign stating: "Roosevelt is a Red!") Roosevelt was increasingly attacked as a traitor to his class, but a large measure of his genius was his ability to hold the more extreme elements of the New Deal in check. Roosevelt's political skills were tested in every way. For instance, Burns writes that Senator Robert Wagner's National Labor Relations Act, which proposed to"[vest] massive economic and political power in organized labor" "was the most radical legislation passed during the New Deal." According to Burns, Roosevelt's initial reaction to the bill was "invariably cool or evasive," and the president, with what Burns describes as "typical Rooseveltian agility," announced his support for the bill only after its passage was certain. Burns demonstrates that Roosevelt's support, both in Congress and among the public, gradually eroded in the late 1930s, but he was, of course, elected again in 1940 and 1944. Roosevelt's nomination in 1940 was especially skillful. Many in his own party favored maintaining the tradition of limiting presidents to two terms, and Democratic Party leaders lined up in the hope of succeeding Roosevelt. Roosevelt outfoxed all of them and was elected to his historic third term.

I believe it is fair to say that Burns admires Roosevelt, but this book is not a whitewash. Burns candidly writes about Roosevelt's "deviousness." And the author is appropriately critical of Roosevelt's attempt to "pack" the Supreme Court following his overwhelming re-election in 1936. However, in my opinion, these instances simply are proof of the truism that great men are not always good men. Burns took the subtitle of this book from the Italian Renaissance political philosopher Machiavelli's dictum that a political leader must be strong like a lion and shrewd like a fox. Franklin D. Roosevelt was both, and that made him a great president. This is a great political biography of that great president

FDR was perhaps the craftiest politician to occupy the White House since Lincoln. The Title, "...Lion and the Fox" is an allusion to Machiavelli's dictum that one must be stouthearted like a lion and crafty like a fox. FDR combined these qualities to achieve political mastery of his time.

This book focus on his life up to the start of WWII. It paints a thorough life portrait of the president and illustrates the events and experiences that shaped this master politician. Although enjoying congressional majorities like no other president (that certainly aided the implementation of his program), FDR had to over come the reluctance of both GOP and Democrat conservatives to rework the federal government into the active economic and social player it is today. McGreggor's book explains how FDR the man made the New Deal possible.

This is a well written book that gives evidence of being thoroughly researched. For anyone interested in presidential history, I'd recommend this book.

Gives a fantastic account of FDR from his privileged childhood and days at Groton, to his harsh induction into the world of politics; the skill at which he maneuvered the political currents to the New York Capital in Albany, and ultimately the White House. Once there Burns gives an account of passionate dedication to the American people, both during the Depression and WWII, that most likely was not seen since Lincoln. A must for anyone's Presidential Biographical collection.

Anyone interested in politics or American history should love this book. The writing style is crisp and entertaining and the author strikes the right balance between explaining long ago and long forgotten events without drowning the reader in unnecesary details. The 1884 election itself was one of the most interesting of our history with sex scandals, charges of political corruption, party splits, and campaign blunders. The author brings the excitement to life and lets the reader understand not only what happened but why it occured and, even more interesting, what the participants had hoped to accomplish with their political strategies. The book succeeds in describing how late 19th century elections looked and felt to the participants. The human dynamic skillfully set out in this book (the cynical maneuverings, the overheated rhetoric, and the intense partisanship)are very familiar with what we experience in campaigns today-this very familiarity helps make Blaine and Cleveland seem real and not just sterile historical figures. Read this book!

The last half of the 19th century is a period that the historians generally give short shrift to. They dutifully plow through it in the obligatory chapter in their rush to get from the Civil War to Teddy Roosevelt, Wilson, and the Progressive Era. The campaign of Grover Cleveland against James Blaine for the presidency in 1884 is just about forgotten. This is too bad because what with the emphasis on character and values (accompanied by some really gross mudslinging), the extensive changes in technology and business, the factionalism and divided government, it was a period much like ours. Summers does an excellent job of dispelling the prevailing view of this period as a doldrum bookended by Lincoln and TR. In a comprehensive yet not overly long book, he shows that substantive issues like the tariff, the relationship of the national government to the states, morality in politics, substance abuse (ie prohibition), and other pressing matters really were at stake, he explores those issues and the men and women who had to face them. This book is one of the best treatments of the 1884 presidential campaign (or any other campaign for that matter) out there. Find a copy of this book and read about a time that is so much like ours.

As an undergraduate at the University of Kentucky some years ago, Professor Mark Summers changed my life and I eventually devoted my life to the study of history. His lectures made the past come alive and seem so fresh and real and vital. Anyone who has read any of his books can relate to the sense of excitement that I am describing, and his latest book is no exception. In fact, it is perhaps his best book yet. Lively, fast-paced, yet scholarly and thought-provoking, Summers' book is everything that his readers have come to expect. I would highly recommend this book to anyone interested in nineteenth-century politics or U.S. history in general, or for those who consider history dry and boring and would like read a book where the past truly does come to life.

As investigative writer and author of the The Professional Paranoid, I found PD/USA jambed tight with useful details and facts, despite a diminutive appearance. I am often asked by others for various helps or information, and often, referring them to PD/USA becomes a perfect starting point for their coming to understand what forces are really at play in the real world. It is NOT a pretty picture...

When former heads of the American and Canadian Psychiatric Associations and many other infulential professional groups came directly from CIA mind control projects...

When, despite CIA telling Congress that mind control did not work and the research was abandoned, that (as is found in the Appendix of The Professional Paranoid) approximately half of all CIA proprietaries operating in the U.S. have something to do with mind control projects...

That anyone who does have a problem CANNOT turn to a professional for help because the professional will automatically label them mentally ill, and perhaps hand deliver them directly to their tormentors 'for further treatment'.

The cover is ugly. The topic uglier. The truth ugliest of all. But not to know the truth is to be an obedient lemming chasing the tail of the doomed critter in front of you.

I do not agree with everything is this book. For example, while I do agree that False Memory Syndrome has been abused in order to cover up real crimes, false memories have also been used to convict innocent people. I have a degree in psychology and the main reason I decided not to go into the profession is because of my disgust with much of it, including its many manufactured "diseases". However, there is still much that is valid with the profession and I have witnessed people being given indisputably false memories under experimental conditions. But this, of course, does not mean every memory is false (in fact, this supports his overall thesis). One has to be careful in criticizing anything with too broad a brush stroke.

That being said, this is a very thoroughly researched book on the history of mind control experiments, especially in the U.S., with references to, e.g., articles written by Nobel Prize recipients. This book blows the lid off of violations of human rights committed by the U.S. government and others, adding to the damage done by the CIA's already damning public admissions about their MK-Ultra program (and only about 5% of the MK-Ultra files avoided destruction in an attempted coverup before it was discovered by the public!). Even if you reject half of the data and conclusions in this book, what is left is not only extremely informative but terrifying.

It is clear from Alex Constantine's writing that he is not a sensationalist, but is genuinely outraged at the injustices committed by the government and wishes to expose them. While this quest may, in my opinion, at times blind him when he is assessing his data, much of it is indisputable and I consider him to be a courageous advocate for the freedom and dignity of human beings and not a charlatan or a phony like many other authors.

I thoroughlly enjoyed this book, and learned a great deal about the dark side of American politics and the warfare state in the process. This is one of the best books I have ever read, bar none. The chapters on CIA covert ops are especially informative.

I happen to know the grandparents (both sets) of one of the students killed in this crash. The book has a big impact on me, not only for the tragedy itself, but that it has a personal meaning also. I had a hardcopy of this book in the library in which I worked and now I want my own copy.

This book was fascinating from the first page until the last. Mr.Kunen has a way with words that will grip the reader as he did me. The intimate details of the crash and the lives of the young victims will bring a tear to your eye. And how Ford Motors was defeated in the end will have you cheering in a bittersweet way. A masterpiece. I have read hundreds of books and this book tops my list to this day even though I first read it 6 years ago.

My math teacher was on the bus when it crashed and allowed me to read one of his two copies of this book, 3 of his friends were killed and if it was n't for his other friend he would have died too for he was sitting 3 rows from the front and saw the youth director get blown up when the explosion occured.

I read this book for a class on the emergence of state society. The book was great for its review of Aztec ideology and its resulting effects on the society. Too many authors ignore the importance of the way people think. However, archaeological evidence does not support their conclusions about the Inca's ancestor worship. But the book was good read, very fast paced and enjoyable. I recommend it.

I read this book as part of a research project into the rise and fall of the Mexica, or Aztec. This book offered an interesting view of the Aztec, as a warfaring society which was propelled by a religous zelous that got out of hand and eventually caused the destabilization of a great empire. While I happen to disagree with certain arguments in this book they are all well justified with valid arguments. This field is constantly changing and is full of writers who don't have the background or the backing for their arguments, this is not one of them. Conrad and Demerest use fresh, compelling, and well thoughtout arguments to make an interesting point. If researching the Inca and Aztec this is a must read to achieve a good view of these two expansionist empires.

The book really gets into the nuts and bolts of the empires, showing you how ideas could give birth to and help expand the two cultures. But it also shows how the same ideas could hinder and even start to destroy the empires later in their existance. Yet it is not hard to read and even delightful at some points. They answer alot of questions I had about the Aztec and Inca, making sure to support everything they say with lots of details. A must of any history library.

Given the Republican Party's recent reaction to the Trent Lott affair, this book is an excellent retelling of the rise of the GOP in the South and its sordid dabbling in racial politics. Earl and Merle Black are two of the most thoughtful and fair observers of Southern politics, and this is some of their best work yet. Occasionally dry and overly laden with charts, the book can drag in places.

This book covers extensively the history of the South over the past century. Presidential and congressional elections are explored in detail. I saw an earlier review alluding to the lack of information regarding Hispanics and Asians; however, i found that the Black brothers DO cover this information, while at the same time admitting that the black/white race issue has been one of the most dominant issues in Southern Politics in the 20th century. If, by the end of this book, you have any remaining questions about the South's role in national politics, I suggest reading the other excellent book by the Blacks, "The Vital South." between these two works, just about everything is covered. The Blacks are amazing--especially Merle!

This book provides readers a wonderful example of just what political scientists are SUPPOSED to be doing. Certainly, we write for one another, but in terms of books; one must be mindful of the amateur who might read your work. The Black brothers make a wonderful team and deserve much credit for reexamining Kevin Phillips' work in 1968 "The Emerging Republican Majority" however; this reader notes there was a conspicuous absence of Phillips' name in the text. To not mention him A SINGLE time in those 400 plus pages represents a obvious omission which should be brought to their attention.
In any event; the charts and graphs were well presented and the trends appearing were nicely explained. I would comment however that the Blacks might have missed the boat on some important observations that could have been made about Florida and Texas by keeping the race question largely contained to the "black/white" paradigm. Certainly the "shell game" played by the Southern Democrats and their eventual flip to the Republican Party can be largely explained by the 1960s Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts but the demographics have definitely changed in the South and contemporary discussions of race and its impact on partisan politics must do more than allude to hispanics or asians. Nevertheless, if you are looking for a book to explore the trending of the "Solid South" toward the Republican Party this one will definitely 'draw the picture.' I thoroughly enjoyed it and even with the few shortcomings noticed by this political scientist (who wishes SHE could have written this book) their presentation of the data is "on the money!"
I would and DO highly recommend this book to my students and to those curious about the "whos, whens, whys, and hows" of the southern dealignment.
Great Job Blacks.... you have done us proud again!

Dr Getty's study of the Terror is among the most groundbreaking and insightful of the last decade. I believe it is the best book on the Terror yet written. What began as a moderate attempt to clean up the Party in 1933 through controled means turned into violent chaos in mid-1937. The Yezhov years are covered deeply with a great reliance on archives avalible. For the first time the documents themselves can be viewed by the reader. Getty clearly defines the periods of the Terror according to their severity. In 1933 people were purged from the Party but it only ment dismissal and a chance for readdmition. In 1936 things began to get bloody but it was still controled by the elites. The explosion of 1937 with the liquidation of top Soviet Marshals signaled the coming of a full blown bloodbath. This period lasted from the last half of 1937 to the first half of 1938. This was largely directed by the NKVD under Yezhov but Getty stresses Yezhov was ordered by Stalin and the Politburo to conduct arrest and executions of party elites in both the Center and provinces along with mass shootings of social marginals. The Terror was horrible yet more conservative numbers of deaths are given. Elites were the primary victims. Getty's statistics appear to be correct. Millions were not executed but social trama of the Terror was horrid. This work shreds Robert Conquest to pieces...

Unlike other mass murderers, the Bolsheviks left a paper trail detailing their horrific criminal deeds. Naturally, dictator Josef Stalin is prominently cited in the formerly top secret transcripts of the Soviet's Central Committee. Others, however, like his nomenklatura henchmen; Lazar Kaganovich, a Jew and rabid Christian hater; Vyacheslav Molotov; Lavrenti Beria; and Genrikh Yagoda, were just as complicit as him. The historian, H. R. Trevor-Roper put it well, "Great massacres may be commanded by tyrants, but they are imposed by people." The authors conservatively estimate that "1.5 million" Communist Party members were killed during the "Great Terror" purges of the 1930s. The majority were shot to death, others died in the GULAG camps, originally established by the fanatical Bolshevik thug, Vladimir I. Lenin. This riveting story opens by telling the sad tale of one Alexander Yulevich Tivel. It is typical of what happened to many of Marxism's true believers. A hack propagandist for Pravda, Tivel was shot as an "enemy of the people" on March 7, 1937, in Moscow, after a perfunctory trial. He was also a Zionist, who had made the fatal mistake of knowing Grigory Zinoviev and Karl Radek. Like Tivel, they were all Jews, who were suspected by the Kremlin elite of plotting with its arch rival, the exiled zealot, Lew Davinovich Bronstein, a/k/a Leon Trotsky. The Tivel drama didn't end there. His wife was sent to Siberia and she wasn't freed until 1953. Their young son was placed in an orphanage for being a "member of the family of a traitor of the Motherland." In this book, too, surprisedly, you will find the modern seeds of the dubious "Hate Crime" concept, championed by Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY). Stalin, in a rant about the putative enemies of his Communist hell hole, is quoted in October, 1937, as saying, "Anyone who by his actions and thoughts-yes, his thoughts-encroaches on the unity of the socialist state, we will destroy them and their kin." I'm sure Schumer, a pompous windbag, will deny the alien-based connection to his legislative scheme. This is an authoritative book that exposes the unspeakable crimes of Stalin's Bolshevik gang against its own party faithful. It should be a sobering lesson to anyone who tends to believe in extremist solutions.

William Hughes, J.D. Baltimore, MD. (Published in the journal of the Social Justice Review, July-August, 2000 issue.)

This book is tremendously useful because it gives a hitherto unknown insight into exactly how Stalin and his closest cronies set in motion the purges of the 1930s. The heart of the book consists of around 200 secret Communist Party documents interspersed with commentary from the authors. The archival material suggests very strongly that the path to the terror was not planned meticulously from the start but consisted of a series of false starts and zigzags until Stalin decided in 1937 to crush all resistance to the party's rule. Of particular interest are a couple of documents which show how many members of the inner Politburo demanded stricter punishments for alleged wrong-doers than Stalin did himself. Barring the discovery of Stalin's diary many of the dictator's motives will remain unknown forever but the documents in this book do paint a largely convincing portrait of an unpopular regime in Moscow lurching from crisis to crisis, trying both to stablise the internal situation and also to eliminate the possibility of serious internal resistance. What does come through very clearly is how arbitrary the terror was and how many of those charged with repressing alleged foreign spies and saboteurs were almost guaranteed to be shot themselves. First the Politburo lashed out at the secret police for not doing enough to stamp out centres of Trotskyite resistance and then issued orders demanding the execution and arrest of millions of people across the country. Later the secret police came under fire for allegedly indulging in indiscriminate terror and repressing too many people. I can understand the point of the Kirkus Reviews contributor who doubted the authors' explanation that the Politburo pushed ahead with the purges because they were indeed convinced enemies lay behind every corner and a coup was always possible. A sense of self-preservation and the need to show Stalin they were onside surely did partly explain their enthusiasm for spilling blood. But this is a minor quibble about an otherwise excellent book.