3 comments about Omaha Blues: A Memory Loop.

1. Joseph Lelyveld's "Omaha Blues", a recollection of his growing up years, is a book that touches all emotions. Having only known the author through books like Seth Mnookin's "Hard News" and his (Lelyveld's) appearances on programs such as Charlie Rose, I felt a certain draw to read "Omaha Blues". I was not disappointed.
   
   Had the term "dysfunctional" been around in the 1940s and 1950s, Lelyveld's family could be described as such. Uprooted every few months it seems, Lelyveld spent much of his childhood with different family members (other than his parents) and with total strangers (the Jensen family in Nebraska). One wonders how this nomadic life can affect the maturity of any child, but he seems, somehow, to have taken much of this in stride. It certainly gave him a foundation for his own independence, to which he alludes.
   
   A large section of the middle of the book is devoted to his boyhood "friend", Ben Goldstein, (aka Ben Lowell, aka George B. Stern) who seems to have served as the author's mentor or avuncular presence. While Lelyveld and Goldstein appeared to have known each other for only a brief few years, the older man certainly played an enormous role in the life of the budding foreign correspondent. That so much of this relationship is left to the imagination of the reader, Lelyveld nonetheless fills in the pieces of how Goldstein was connected to his own family...that story, in itself, is worth the read of "Omaha Blues".
   
   I appreciate the author's candor regarding his own recollections of these formative years. While he was nicknamed "the memory boy", Lelyveld is not above letting us know that his own memory is sometimes very faulty. This admission adds to the charm of the book and allows him to be as human as possible.
   
   "Omaha Blues" is told straight from the author's heart. I highly recommend it to any reader who wishes to explore the depths of his or her own family relationships. Joseph Lelyveld has given us his remembrances in a most affective way.



2. my confession first, since this book is a quasi-memoir (the author calls it a memory loop, though it reads like a mobious strip of guilt, pain, poignancy, and truth-seeking), i was attracted to this book because joe lelyveld's father was my rabbi growing up in cleveland. i really didn't enjoy going to fairmont temple as a youngster, not on sundays and certainly not twice a week for hebrew school when around 4:30 p.m, once a week, we filed into the chapel, and the rabbi would lead us through the standard prayers. i rarely, rarely, rarely go to temple these days ( six months on a kibbutz in the negev when i was 19 did wonders for my belief in cultural judaism at the expense of religiousity). but this book is a confrontation between memory and loss in the attempt to untangle destiny from fate. the battleground is the uneasy relationship between father and son, arthur and joe, with his mother providing the drama that sets things spinning off-kilter. the pages are thick with loss and regret; there is none of the philip roth's comic shtick that jumps at the reader in his autobiographical writings (or thinly veiled fictional renderings.) i applaud mr. lelyveld for having the courage to confront his past, especially as he must look far back in time, decades, to pry loose shards of recollection. know thyself, socrates counseled. this book satisfies the author's need to know, though it would be foolish to expect a complete and full answer.
   
   so just how close were father and son? not very. towards the end of the book, the son lets fly this awareness: "we seldom quarreled and we were never close." nor did they engage in much shop talk; rabbi lelyvled was one of the most prominent rabbis in america, and his son rose to become the man in charge at the ny times. but they steered clear discussing their jobs or careers. which to me, is, frighteningly pathological. perhaps the need to avoid conflict at all costs was what drove this arrangement, but as a reader, i wanted to know about the schisms that had to exist, especially in matter of political coverage that the times devoted to the arab-israeli saga.
   
   naturally, with an emotionally distant father, joe needed another father figure to project his hopes and desires as he entered his adolescence, and the figure who emerged is a complicated rabbi/communist/friend of his father who occupies the moral center--and about 50 pages--of this slim book. it's here that joe's reportorial skills are in full display as he pieces together the mysterious life of ben goldstein/ben lowell.
   
   as for my own recollection of rabbi lelyvled: I remember the newspaper photo of him in his blood-soaked shirt following a vicious beating by white thugs in the south in the early 60s. I was seven or so when this occured. and i remember his rather stiff and aloof demeanor during religious services. anyway, i was too young to make sense of any of his sermons. but every time he stood in front of the congregation, I would keep picturing the rabbi, with the bandage over his eye and the blood soaked shirt. he achieved a somewhat heroic stature as a result of this constant visualization
   
   this book, alas, by his son, brings the rabbi down to earth. not maliciously, but in a careful, circumspect way, we see a man defined by his son who, in his seventh decade is still trying to define himself as a welter of repressed memories surfaced. one walks away from this sad, sad book hoping to have read these words from rabbi to son, " I love you, son." joe does tell his father that he loves him, but by then, the rabbi is lying in a vegetative state as a result of a brain tumor. the father can't hear the son. or respond to him. now, that's a painful memory loop. memories, after all, are for the living.



3. I purchased this book because I enjoyed Lleyveld's work at the New York Times and thought his autobiography would be of interest. It proved to be interesting for other reasons, as well. Firstly, it provides a glimpse of what it life must have been like for rural Jews in early-20th century America. As a native of Alabama, I've wondered how life must have been like for Jews then, and this book certainly answers that question. Also, as a reporter, Mr. Lleyveld is able to research his early years and effectively establish or disprove the validity of his memories. This proves very interesting and he deserves a lot of credit for this. It must have been very difficult to rely on objectively researched clues for the story of his life, instead of his own memories, especially considering that oftentimes his own memories proved false.

5 comments about Times of My Life and My Life with the Times.

1. I thoroughly enjoyed this book. As an avid reader of the New York Times, it provided a fantastic behind-the-scenes look at how some of the major events of the 20th Century were captured and recorded in the "Newspaper of record." Not only was it a fabulous account of NYT, Max Frankel's personal account of his life read like a novel--I couldn't wait to find out what happened next. If you appreciate current events, the media, and history--you'll love this book.



2. The essential story of Mr. Frankel's extraordinary memoir has been amply described in the reviews on this site, and requires no further repetition by me. I urge everyone to read them, and of course to read the book.

   Hardly anyone can fail to be moved by the prelude to his story, his family's escape from the Nazis. Mr. Frankel's mother perhaps deserves at the least a book of her own story. A remarkable woman.

   Mr Frankel's story might be of another brilliant journalist whose professional story alone is worth the telling, and it is. But for me, it is his almost brutal, scalpel-like self-dissecting to reveal to us his inner turmoil in meeting challenges of his life-style and career that riveted me to the book.

   Early in life, he tells us, he learned to always prepare an escape route, another way out. Repeatedly, he recounts many brushes with conflict where he seemed to side-step adversity, to protect himself from pain, to indeed take another way out. Courageous and wise, or cowardly and untrustworthy as a human being? He so presents himself to us for our judgement. He accurately points out how news media (persons) suffer the worst of narcissist sensitity at criticism, yet he stands up bravely, I think, lead on by his personal and professional vision while living in a fish bowl.

   How many of us as private people, or world renown persons could stand so tall? I thank Mr Frankel for forty years of helping to educate me, and the rest of us to boot.

   Irwin Moss, LA mooseman01@aol.com PS. Candor requires me to reveal playing tennis once with Mr. Frankel at Cape Cod many years ago. One learns and reveals much in a tennis game.




3. The first part of the book dealing with the author and his mother's travails in pre-WWII Germany in Weissenfels was absolutely the best part of the book. (And, this was unexpected as I bought the book to read about the editor of my favorite newspaper.) The author puts a human face to his German friends, neighbors, towns people, local officials, and even the Nazi that finally gave the exit visa to Frau Frankel and her son, Max. Even after the war and the Holocaust, Frankel admits he maintained some empathy with the ordinary German folk. I found this perspective to be refreshing and enlightening as it seemed more realistic of the German peoples and their behavior in pre-War Germany. (I do not wish to politicize my book review, please read the book to get your own opinion on this matter-- although one does have to remember Frankel's experiences were that of a young boy). In fact, most of the book was written in a honest, straight-forward manner. The authos's candor was a surprise on many topics including those of race. It is always refreshing to read an honest appraisal rather than the double talk you hear from politician-types.

   The remainder of the book amazed me that Max Frankel lived through and was involved in many of the historic events that occurred during the Cold War. Although at times Frankel seemed to explain in hindsight his prescience at events about to occur on the world stage. (As aside, you wonder why you didn't have people like him working for the CIA).

   An aspect of the book that I didn't enjoy was the author's apologetic tone in explaining his executive decisions while an editor at the NY Times. It seemed this portion of the autobiography was aimed at the co-workers and people at NY Times that Frankel had worked with.

   Definately, the parts of the book talking about the author's personal experiences, whether in Germany, Washington Heights, or the tragic illness of his wife were captivating. The rest about his career seemed routine.




4. This book begins in Germany, where the author was born in 1930. The account of how he and his parents got out of Hitler's grasp is vivid and breathtaking, and alone is worth the price of the book. Then his account of growing up in New York, his education in high school and college, and how he became connected with the New York Times is of sustaining interest, as is his account of his career there. I thought it equally as good as Katherine Graham's Pulitzer-prize-winning account of her career, and all it told of the Washington Post.



5. I enjoyed the Max Frankel story on many levels. The story of the family escape from Nazi Germany was riviting and worthing of an entire book. The balance of the book was not riviting, but was nevertheless interesting and entertaining. I might not have finised the book except that it is exceptionally well written (I guess that that should not be a surprise considering the source!). In many places in reads all most like poetry. Word choices were very excellent without getting cute.

5 comments about A Red State of Mind: How a Catfish Queen Reject Became a Liberty Belle.

1. I loved this book. Nancy French is able to point out the cultural differences in our society through anecdotes which are very funny. Conservatives will be encouraged and I think liberals will see that conservatives aren't as intolerant as the main stream media portrays them.



2. A wonderful glimpse at the subtle (and not so subtle) cultural differences in our country. Mostly funny, but with some serious points, and relevant throughout. I would recommend this book to anyone.



3. It's been a while since I finished reading this book. I enjoyed it a great deal. I was 27 when I left the South and moved to upstate NY -- like the author I found that life was VERY different outside the South. A lot of her observations rang true and made me laugh out loud.
   
   Very funny and a good read.



4. I see Nancy French has continued to poison political discourse with her typical right-wing "I'm right and everyone is entitled to my opinion" attitude, this time in book-length form.
   
   I'm getting really tired of people with her extreme right-wing view constantly having their viewpoints shoved down my throat (even when I don't want to hear it). And I'm equally tired of hearing about their right to free speech. Any sane adult knows that, but too bad the "other side" doesn't see it that way.
   
   Isn't it too bad that a Northerner can't have their non-right wing view all over the place in southern cities the way French did in Philadelphia newspapers?
   
   Speaking of which, too bad French doesn't tell the whole story of how she was thoroughly ripped in every single paper where her rants appeared (and they were mostly in the Philadelphia City Paper, a free weekly). Every single piece said the same thing: George Bush is god and anyone who disagrees with that is wrong and I don't want to hear it. That gets tiresome after the first 100 times.
   
   And I have a real problem with French's claims that she possesses those good ol' American values. Her values, and definitely those of the South, are *not* everyones' values, and everyone in the South does not share those "values." It's long overdue to hear from the non-right-wing folks fighting to have their voices heard in a part of the country that completely shuts out opposing opinions.
   
   What we have here is a cutting-edge right-wing Republican being published time and again in a right-wing Republican-owned media. She sure is a renegade.
   
   Now let's hear it from the people who are of a "blue" state of mind. - Donna Di Giacomo



5. Nancy French has proven one can be both humorous and right, and I don't mean right in the way of political description. Her book as both laugh-out-loud moments, and right-on moments, entertaining and motivating one to stand up for one's beliefs at the same time. Would that there were more books of this genre. Thanks Nancy.

No comments about Claude McKay: A Black Poet's Struggle for Identity.

5 comments about A Dangerous Liaison: 2One Woman's Journey into a World of Aristocracy, Depravity, and Obsession.

1. The story of the marriage of the American Sheri Heller and a Belgian nobleman Jacques De Borchgrave.
   The problems begin when Sheri doesn't want to undergo the plastic surgery asked by her husband, who wanted a bigger bosom!
   This book is a festival of mud-slinging on her ex-husband and his family. They are, for the author, a bunch of lesbian and bisexual cuckolds. She didn't forget to add in the book photographs of the incriminated villains.
   How did the author find a publisher for this ludicrous and totally uninteresting story and for the horribly bad porn?



2. "This year's most fabulous book" -- those were the words of the New York Times Book Section. Quite an accolade... and I also remember the review said that the book was the most fun, the best summer book, and a terrific read. Naturally I was intrigued by such fulsome praise and bought the book -- and I was not disappointed! I think the reviewer above must be a friend of the Baron's family, otherwise one cannot help but get swept away into the beautiful romance and ultimate betrayal of a young, beautiful and innocent girl by the Jekyll/Hyde man that manipulated her.
   This book starts like a Harlequin Romance. Young Sheri meets the man of her dreams (and everyone's dreams) on an airplane -- the place your mother told you you would meet great men. She glimpses into the jet-set life-style of this aristocratic person. The story goes on, the romance continues to its fruition ... but then ---
   Hey, unlike the person above, I don't want to give anything away. Read this! It's entertaining and there are definitely lessons to be learned. I wish Sheri de Borchgrave well ... she deserves it after what she went through with the Baron!!!!!



3. I thought this was an excellent story. I don't recall quite how I stumbled upon this book but I am very glad I did. I also had the pleasure of seeing the Baroness on a talk show telling her story to the world. It is truly a fascinating story of good and evil. When Sheri meets Jacques you are very quickly caught up in their captivating romance. As he wines and dines her, buys her expensive clothes and takes her on exotic vacations this book at first seems like a wonderful romance novel. Then as Sheri falls for Jacques she begins to see a tiny hint of his dark side but she pushes it out of her mind because she thinks its just a difference of his European nobility and her American nature. I think many of us who have been swept off of our feet by Mr Wonderful can often relate to Sheri as she sees a warning sign or two but turned a blind eye because she wanted to believe the best in her prince charming.
   
   After Sheri moves to Belgium to become the Baroness she sees Jacques dark side begin to unveil itself and Sheri finds her self in a world of manic depressive behavior, incest, wild sex parties and mental abuse all of which seems to be covered up by Jacques family. It is entirely a world to which most of us cannot relate but you feel for Sheri as she realizes she is trapped in a marriage in a foreign country with a mentally disturbed person and this hedonistic lifestyle and she doesn't know how to get out. Will Sheri get out, will she be able to 'cure' her husband, what will occur next, just when she thinks she's seen it all she learns something else.
   
   It is a classic story of a rich family who's money and power covers up their mentally ill son and the poor woman who is romanced into the lifestyle and before she realizes it she is trapped and doesn't know how to get out and has no one to help her.
   
   This book will completely draws you in from beginning to end.



4. Sheri Heller, a beautiful young New Yorker, met a tall, handsome, elegant Belgian on a plane. Soon Baron Jacques de Borchgrave had seduced her and treated her to exotic trips and expensive clothing. She was swept off her feet, but after they married (as is so often the case), her new husband's mask of gentility came off. This is a story of runaway narcissism and sexual deviance. There is a lot detail about some rather untypical sex, so it's not reading for the easily shocked. Sheri de Borchgrave is an intelligent observer of her own life, and the book is fascinating and well-written. I have never read anything like it.



5. I have read this book more than once, and do not agree with the one reviewer who states that it is a ludicrous piece of work. I think it's great but...
   
   The former Sheri Heller, now Baroness Sheri de Borchgrave, obviously meant
   not to speak about her fears for the breast operation over the telephone because she had an inkling the Baron then would not wish to carry on with the wedding plans. He was correct to accuse her of that. She should never have married him, and then to stay with him after he began his cruel
   mistreatment? Come on, people! She really enjoyed that nobel lifestyle!
   
   If she didn't, why did being called Madame la Baronne tickle her? Why did
   she go into length about the lofty titles of Belgium, the descriptions of the castles, and the many course meals with fine wines and all that?
   
   Sheri knew what she was doing when she snagged her Baron; it was just very
   convenient for her when he died and left her the Baroness for life!

1 comments about The Edmund Wilson Reader.

1. Professor Dabney who edits the Reader writes interesting and informative introductions. His overview is also comprehensive and incisive. In fact, his style is similar to Edmund Wilson's. Reading the selections from Wilson is just a sheer joy. If we only had more essayists, critics and observers like Edmund and his generation, we would be a lot better off in so many ways as a society and a culture.

No comments about The world of Lincoln Steffens (American century series).

5 comments about Ambushed: A War Reporter's Life on the Line.

1. When I first picked up Ian Stewart's "Ambushed: A War Reporter's Life on the Line" I had some trepidation. I worried I would finish it with the same feeling I had when I read "All the President's Men." I enjoyed that book, but I had a feeling it was only really compelling to people interested in history, politics or journalism. Not that those topics are boring - they just don't always have much heart or soul.
   With Stewart's book, I was pleasantly suprised. Although a good portion of the book focuses on the political climates he faced as a war correspondent, it also gets to the heart of how war affected people in the places he covered. With relative grace, Stewart manages to balance the bare-bones reality of war with the personal struggles he had covering it as the Associated Press' West Africa bureau chief. He brings real emotion to the book by describing both fighting in the streets and the reactions of children who see it every day.
   But the real heart of the story is apparent in the final third of the book, after Stewart has been shot in the head by rebels in Sierra Leone. As he describes the rehabilitation process following his injury it becomes more and more evident what war reporters really face. It's really compelling to analyze, along with Stewart, why those journalists do what they do and whether it is worth the sacrifice.
   In the simplest terms, the book is interesting because it tells one person's story in a way that most people, not just journalists or history and politics buffs, can relate to. By showing how Stewart covered war and how he dealt with it personally, "Ambushed" opens a window into war that most of us will never get to experience first-hand.



2. I read Freetown Ambush published by Penguin Canada. If this is the American version of the same book, I highly recommend it.
   Stewart's description of Ivory Coast and the disintegration of a society is compelling and the descriptions of the inside workings of the AP is very interesting. The touching story of his recovery is short and sweet. His writing style keeps moving and he explains the confusing situation in West Africa very well.



3. In this book you get the information you will not see on any TV station. You recieve first hand the experience of a war reporter. The author is very good about telling you the situation before he travels to his destination. He doesn't hold anything back. He makes the story come alive with his descriptions.
   My favorite part of the book was his recovery period. He had to work so hard to find out who he truly was and what he had to overcome was amazing. It opened my eyes to the dangers that reporters face to bring us the news.



4. Ian Stewart's "Ambushed" is a commendable book worthy of use as a introduction to life behind the lines, however it falls short of the actual horrors of war. Stewart's writing is linear, easy to read, and palatable for most readers and the stories he has to tell are courageous. However I am a bit reticent to give his book four or five stars because he, albeit probably unintentionally, doesnt portray the soul-crushing horrors of war as they really are. Having worked and witnessed the atrocities in Sierra Leone, the DRC, and Cambodia myself I sympathize with Ian but I can assure you his book is a trip to Disneyland compared to the actualities of the situation in these war torn countries. I'm glad that his book brings light to the Sierra Leone situation (which fortunatly is being extinguished) to the public. If one wants a more to real life of todays modern and barbaric wars I suggest reading Jon Steele's "War Junkie". This horribly named book was written by an ITN news photographer but he should have been a journalist. Jon has covered twice as many wars as Ian(not that this is a comparision) however no book has ever given me nightmares or brought more emotion to what really happens behind the lines as his book has. Read it with caution, I can still smell the stench of Rwanda's murdered...



5. Stewart does give a number of experiences in shocking & vivid detail, but I was hoping for more time spent on the experiences of the people in Africa, opposed to HIS experience of Africa and five entire chapters on his own experience of being shot.
   The horrible experiences of the people he sees deserve much more attention than a decadent (an example on page 159) Western reporter who meets an unfortunate experience. On top of this he brings slanted and self-admitted ignorant views on Africa ("The more I discovered, the more I grew angry and disgusted at Africa's recent colonial experience, but I still knew little about African history" page 35).
   Stewart makes a few blanket accusations against the West for all that is wrong in Africa ("Europe demonstrated to Africa that self-serving greed outweighed all else" page 129) with no mention to the equally ruthless Arab slave traders who oppressed Africa before the white man. The book makes Stewart seem more self centered than compassionate. His criticism of the west is best re-directed to his own book: "the West's luxury and comfort comes before the human rights of African citizens" page 130.

1 comments about Dateline: White House.

1. I read her "Front Row at the White House" first and expected to get the same information, just not as many presidents. But in her first book, Ms. Thomas included more information than in her second book.

   You've always read about the presidents, by reading this book you get a 'behind the scenes' glimpse into their lives and how the reporters do their jobs.

5 comments about Left Illusions: An Intellectual Odyssey.

1. I have been a huge David Horowitz fan since 2000 when his Hating Whitey was the book that finally made me realize how foolish I had been to ever vote for the Democrats in the first place. In the time since, I have read just about everything he has ever written. Left Illusions is a compendium of essays that encompass his entire career as a writer and a thinker. A few articles, such as The Passion of the Jews, date back to the time when he was a radical. One of them he probably wishes he had back as it makes mention of Noam Chomsky's "intellectual integrity and moral courage" which is as much a relic of a bygone age as polyester pantsuits and wondering whether the Rosenbergs were guilty. Of course, even when he was a leftist David Horowitz was a great polemicist and seeing the way his mind and outlook have blossomed over time is a worthy exercise. If anyone out there only knows him as a television personality and pundit then this work is heartily recommended as it offers up 400 pages of Horowitz's best stuff. How to Beat the Democrats and The Art of Political War are prerequisites for conservatives nowadays--particularly after George W. Bush has turned the GOP into a Grand Spending Party. His treatment of AIDS and the Radical Holocaust--which came about due to the left's refusal to shut down the bathhouses and honestly discuss HIV transmission--is outstanding and unique as few commentators had the guts to address these issues the way he did at the time. The idea of the left being "Neo-Communist" has unfortunately never caught on as he makes a convincing case here for our adopting that moniker as a means to describe them. It is not a stretch considering their hatred for corporations and their lust for stealing from the people to give to the government. There is also a previously unpublished piece, The Era of Progressive Witch-Hunts, which is included as well. Overall, Left Illusions is a weighty and mighty political toolbox.



2. Did He clarify that he is a Jewish Zionist? "Deception" is what the Zionists believe in to achieve their goals.



3. What makes this book special is that it contains writings by Horowitz from the beginning, thereby providing an illuminating overview of his intellectual development from New Left ideologue (destructive Marxist) to a champion of freedom. There are articles, essays and book excerpts covering a broad spectrum of issues encompassing inter alia the roots of the New Left, the Cold War, Nicaragua, AIDS, the collapse of communism, race relations, the culture wars, political correctness, freedom of speech, political radicalism, the Middle East situation, the Clinton presidency and the War on Terror.
   
   Of these selections, 28 had never been published in book form or were previously out of print. The introduction by Jamie Glazov provides absorbing background information on Horowitz's intellectual journey with reference to and quotes from his many articles and books like Destructive Generation (1989) - an analysis of the legacy of the New Left, the autobiography Radical Son (1997) and its intellectual companion piece The Politics of Bad Faith (1998).
   
   Amongst the earlier leftist pieces from Ramparts, "The Passion of the Jews" is thought-provoking, especially when compared to his later succinct essay on beleaguered Israel: "Why Israel is the Victim". A gifted wordsmith, Horowitz always intrigues and provokes and often amuses, for example when he labels as "Kitsch Marxism" certain aspects of leftist ideology, the whole of which he considers a crypto religion, like a Gnostic heresy. The earlier leftist pieces made me laugh out loud for another reason - the overwrought, fatuous and impenetrable style characteristic of that political persuasion.
   
   Horowitz' dissection of Multiculturalism - another spawn of Marxism - is particularly lucid, exposing the ways this abomination has infiltrated American society through the schools, colleges and mass media. The Multiculti cult is an assault on America's national culture, an attempt to overturn the successful melting pot in order to sever the bonds that unite all Americans. He argues convincingly that today's leftists have the same agenda as the Marxists that supported the Soviet Empire. By undermining the country's social foundation they are trying to destroy its national identity.
   
   The author is considered "confrontational" in the same way as Ann Coulter, meaning he's a brave cultural warrior who relentlessly challenges the tenured termites in their campus lairs. In this regard, see his books The Professors and Indoctrination U:The Left's War Against Academic Freedom. I admire the way in which he turns the aggressive tactics of the vipers back on them without however stooping to their level of unhinged invective.
   
   Long may this courageous man expose the treason of the sinisterist Moonbats and the Wingnuts of the far right, and their ties to the enemies of the West, as he does so brilliantly in Unholy Alliance. Left Illusions concludes with a bibliography of Horowitz's work up to 2005. I also recommend The Death of Right and Wrong by Tammy Bruce and What's Left?: How Liberals Lost their Way by Nick Cohen.



4. In reading these other commentaries, it never ceases to amaze me that so many Leftists or Leftist sympathizers fly into paroxysms of rage, vitriolic insults or meandering diversionary accusations whenever someone points out their own ideology's record of crimes and deceptions.
   As a former Trotskyist myself, I can say that the anti-Horowitz comments here are a "flim-flam" diversion from the specificity of David Horowitz's book. The absence of evidence against someone being a "fifth columnist" is not evidence of absence. One need only READ much of the propaganda put out by the Left to understand that many on the Left -- either wittingly or unwittingly -- have created a "propaganda alliance of convenience" with Jihadists when they frequently portray Islamic fanatics as some sort of "liberation" resistance fighters. It is manifestly obvious that many of the opinion-makers on the Left have crawled into a temporary propaganda "bed" with Islamic partisans, because the Left and Islamists are both opposed to American market capitalism and American commercial dominance, and many on the Left, with their usual tunnel-vision, see modern market capitalism as a greater "evil" than any other evil . . . no matter how immediate or real other evils may be. Islamists and Jihadists like to portray themselves as "revolutionaries" against western "imperialism", but the Islamic agenda is EXPLICITLY imperialist, and pursuing that agenda (spreading the RULE of Islam by any means necessary) is considered a sacred duty in the Quran. I know, because I have read the Quran in its entirety, more than once, as well as many commentaries from Islamic scholars. It is NOT equivocal . . . despite frequent claims to the contrary by the "useful idiots".
   Trotsky spoke about the "useful idiots" . . . those naive and soft-hearted liberals, pacifists and "progressives" who helped to promote Bolshevism in the minds of fools because they were all too willing to make excuses for its extremism, to sympathize with its "motives", to rationalize its terrorism under the claim of helping the downtrodden, and to promote the "working class" goals of a totalitarian ideology through the press. When the dust had settled, and Bolshevism had seized control, many of those same liberals, pacifists, anarchists and other assorted bleeding hearts, who had served as useful idiots, were the first to be shot. Islamist/Jihadist propaganda machines are now making use of the current useful idiots in the western Left. Most of the population of western Europe, in a hallucinatory fog of "multiculturalism", seem to be refusing to come to terms with the fact that their secular democratic societies are being gradually eroded by a continuous stream of Muslim immigrants bearing a high birth rate, and, who are collectively led by opportunists with a decidedly un-secular agenda. Why do so many people on the Left, and even some on the Right, seem to be incapable of taking extremist Muslims seriously, even when the fanatics OPENLY declare their intentions in the midst of the democratic societies which have, idiotically, given them refuge? Do the useful idiots think the fanatics are kidding? Do they think they are simply engaging in hyperbole?
   David Horowitz has long been trying to emphasize that naive and gullible people, who have been ideologically brain-washed to despise and demonize their own Constitutional republic and its social system, can be "traitorous", "subversive" . . . acting like a "fifth-column", etc. . . . without realizing that they are being manipulated as useful idiots. I know, because in my own mis-spent youth, I was being used by fellow Trotskyists and other Marxists to promote and actively aid the despotism of Fidel Castro . . . until I came to my senses and stopped believing the lies of his apologists. Horowitz is not saying that people should be jailed simply for having naive opinions and a complete lack of a sense of proportion and analytical discrimination in distinguishing lesser evils from greater evils. It is, however, imperative that they wise up and come to an understanding of how they are often used by those with a totalitarian agenda. David Horowitz's parents were indeed fortunate that they were not living in a true totalitarian society . . . especially one with genocidal punishments against those with their ideology. It is wrong to jail someone for merely having an opinion. However, if two people I knew had gone so far as to actually break the law in order to undermine the traditional Constitutional democratic structure of the U.S., just as I blindly and foolishly did in my youth, I would turn them in even if they were my own parents.



5. The book is a compendium of articles,and most of them were published before. It gives us an intellectual history of his rise in the Left, and his eventual disaffection with it. It thus includes some of his earlier left-wing pieces and includes some published in the radical Ramparts that he formerly edited. However,the bulk of the articles here come from his new found conservatism, and they feature some of his best writings.
   
   Howorwitz has already covered his previous thoughts in book form, especially in The Destructive Generation: Second Thoughts About the Sixties, and Radical Son (1997). In those he covered a wide range of issues, with all of the conservative battlegrounds given a run. So, three decades worth of controversy are covered; there are articles on Solzhenitsyn, Nicaragua, racism, political correctness on campus, AIDS, free speech, multiculturalism, the Middle East crisis, terrorism, and the Clinton years all given judicious treatment.
   
   It was not really a religious conversion that led to this change of heart. It was an increased awareness that the Left was simply hypocritical, constantly denouncing supposed atrocities of capitalism and American foreign policy, and it ignored or condoned the barbarism of socialism and leftist dictators. A tremendous amount of human blood had been shed on the altars of leftist utopianism, Horowitz discovered.
   
   Thus as someone who has been there, his criticisms of the left should be heard. Not very many have renounced their leftwing past. Irving Kristol said that a neoconservative is a liberal who had been mugged by reality. Most leftists prefer to live with their illusions than take a stand for reality.
   
   Horowitz outlines the extreme reactions of fellow leftists to his realignment. He hoped that others would see the light; however, Horowitz instead received vitriol, censure, and abuse. He hoped that other radicals would make this acknowledgment: "We greatly exaggerated the sins of America and underestimated its decencies and virtues, and we're sorry". But such confessions were few and far between. Virtually all leftists stuck to their utopianism, to the "god that failed".
   
   There exists a left-liberalism dominance in the US that makes it hard for other views to be heard. Horowitz documents the uphill struggle in promoting a conservative voice in such a climate.
   
   For example, in US colleges there is a new McCarthyism of the left. Horowitz visited 200 such campuses in the past decade, and he knows that most have repudiated their liberal arts origins (which saw freedom speech and genuine intellectual inquiry as virtues) and have embraced political radicalism instead. Now censorship, political correctness and leftwing ideology predominate in these campuses.
   
   Feminists, gay rights activists, radical socialists, and haters of America and democracy can all freely speak their minds at American campuses; however, conservatives do so at their own peril. It is rare for conservatives to manage to get a speaking engagement. Horowitz has received hatred and abuse when speaking as a conservative; more than he ever did as a Communist or socialist. At the U of Wisconsin, for instance, Horowitz notes that while a $500 grant was given to a conservative student group, and $1,000,000 in grants was given to various leftist extremist groups.
   
   Horowitz also documents that real difficulties conservatives face on campus, and he outlines the overwhelming leftist slant summoned up against them. For example, Horowitz examines the faculty of a number of leading universities; he shows that on average only around five per cent of faculty identify as Republicans. It is very difficult for conservative students on campus becasue they are up against a stacked deck.
   
   The media is no better with its left and liberal domination that routinely censors out conservative voices. The prejudices of a leftist media are well-documented in this book. Of course this radical leftwing domination of these institutions of power and influence is not accidental. Italian Marxist Gramsci urged fellow communists in the 1930s to do this very thing. And they have succeeded very well in achieving these goals.
   
   Thus one has to ask the reason that a person would want to surrender an apparently winning position for what seems to be a lost cause. Horowitz has asked himself this very question numerous times. His final lines in this book address this question again, and he asks whether the truth will continue to remain in the shadows. He hopes that it will not. Truth is very powerful, and truth will prevail.