3 comments about I Chose China: The Metamorphosis of a Country and a Man.

1. I read his book with curiosity. I paid attention to hisnarration of political events and found them to be chronologicallyprecise. The only drawback is that he had neutralized many of the notorious events like Tiananmen Massacre and the Cultural Revolution etc.

   The Chinese revolution is a tragedy from the very start when Dr Sun had to ally himself with the communists and Soviet Russia, but Mr Shapiro apparently was more influenced by the events starting from 1947 and the full-blown civil wars between communists and nationalists.

   One thing I would like to point out is that Mr Shapiro, like all the communists and the people of the privileged class (enjoying free medicare, housing, retirement pay, car, and free trips to USA and Israel), would be doomed to ignore the nature of Chinese society, i.e., communists CASTE society, where 70-80% of Chinese population still live, without the aforementioned benefits: the daughters of those peasants burnt to death in prison-like toy factories set up by the joint ventures of red capitalists and foreign capitalists in SEZ and costal cities, the husbands and youths being the coolie responsible for buidling the skycrapers across China, and the wives tilling the fields under the sun and in the rains for 50 years. Mr Shapiro would not understand that while gestapos could move around in China or out of China using multiple passports, the people in the CASTE could not do so, with miners continuing to die on the yearly basis in caveins and explosions, the oil-workers continuing to be contained in Western China, and the peasant-born children forever bound to their birthplace.

   -- CASTE means the children born would have to take mother's birth place as their locality of registration under communist doctrines, for sake of social stability and their ease of economic exploitation.

   Certainly, I would give credit to his account of Chinese history, especially the part about Qin's terra cotta sooldiers, the civil service exams, the ancient legal system, and the history of Se Mu Ren (color-eyed people) and the Jew history in China. History-wise, I would only add that Han Dynasty was not a succession of Qin Empire in any sense. In fact, the beginning of Han is a RESTORATION of Zhou Dynasty system, namely, the restoration of dukedoms and principalities, as manifested by the enthronement of those kings and dukes in respective localities of those dukedoms and principalities, under the supervision of nominal king of Chu (a shephard boy, said to be the grandson of last Chu king) and the two generals of Xiang Yu and Liu Bang (later the first emperor of Han).

   I would say a critical analysis of the book is worthwhile, and a comparative study with other books such as the one written by Mao's personal doctor from year 1955 to 1976 would be of great help.




2. Sidney Shapiro went to China just after World War II. He had studied Chinese before coming, but he did not have a background in China, and had not planned to stay. He met and married a Chinese woman, and ended up staying on after the Communist takeover, working for the Chinese government as a translator. Shapiro is a very lucid writer, and easy to follow, but he seems obliged to rationalize some things about his adopted country that are hard to defend. For example, he says that Western missionaries left China after the war because they "were not needed anymore." Although I believe that his description of his life in China is an honest portrayal, there is always the feeling that he is sugarcoating policies that were clearly ill-fated. But Shapiro's book is just as noticeable for the things he concedes, such as the lack of press freedom in China. This book would be of special interest to individuals with an American frame of reference, because Shapiro is an American, and he writes in a very American style. Yet, he has lived and worked in China since just after World War II, a period of 50 years at the time the book was written in the mid nineties. Clearly, he has a better perspective on China than any other American born writer. You will not want to miss this book, but I would suggest reading a few of the others first, so that you have a little better framework from which to evaluate this one.



3. After reading Mr. Shapiro's "I Choose China", I have had much mixed feelings.

   In the book, Mr. Shapiro's tone about Mao is almost identical as the "People's Daily" - the official Chinese newspaper of propaganda nature. He is positive about Deng XiaoPing and his successors as well.

   In reality, Deng abolished Mao's policies and created a capitalistic society in 1979. It makes me wonder why Mr. Shapiro wrote about Mao according to the Chinese official guidelines while most Chinese people know very well that Mao was a man who committed unpardonable crimes to the Chinese people.

   To many Chinese, Mao was a devil while Deng was a "kind of" saint. How can the devil and the saint be praised in the same time?

   Mr. Shapiro narrated that his money was tight due to the Chinese currency being low in terms of the exchange rates. The cost of foreign travel was astronomical to the Chinese citizens. Yet he was able to travel to the US and Europe for many times including the pre-Deng years. How were his trips funded? The Chinese government gave him special treatment? I would think so. His grand daughter could even attend an expensive private school in Minnesota. Who paid for it? Alas, politics, connections, privileges etc... Were the readers informed? Nah...

   To sum up, like they have done to many other westerners who live in China in the past and present, I think the Chinese government for political reasons has used Mr. Shapiro. These westerners were sheltered, were provided comfortable living, and were used for propaganda.

   While I admire the great classical translation works by Mr. Shapiro (like Shui Hu and Family by Ba Jin), with much regret, I have to say that Sidney Shapiro only painted the bright side of the Chinese society in his book. The many years of darkness were simply buried.To state it unkindly, the author was a product of brainwash, Chinese style.

1 comments about John Marshall Harlan: Great Dissenter of the Warren Court.

1. Tinsley Yarbrough does a great justice to Supreme Court Justice John Marshall Harlan with this work.

   Often overlooked and neglected, the second Harlan was actually more accomplished than the first, and may very well be the most astute and distinguished dissenter in the history of the Supreme Court. A man of amazing scholarly achievement and disciplined intellectuality, Harlan was actually a more well rounded and principled judicial figure than many of the more popular activist justices during his time of service.

   I am very surprised that this is the first review of this book. Mr. Yarbrough put together a wonderful and sober minded biography of a brilliant figure deserving of a lot more attention than he's been afforded. I highly recommend this work to anyone interested in the Supreme Court and one of the better justices ever to occupy the bench.

4 comments about Texas Tornado.

1. The book is not only a rich history of the fight for women's rights in Texas and the US but a wonderful look into the life of an incredible woman. The story is told with such warmth that you end up loving this tough, spunky, little woman. The book is a must read for every lawyer in the state of Texas while also a wonderful example of a dedicated wife (under often horrid circumstances) and a devoted mother.
   Louise Raggio is definitely a Texas Tornado.



2. I thought that Colin Edwards was the Texas Tornado?? MotoGP ring a bell!?? Good Luck at Brno CEII!! This book on women's rights is great by the way, except for they shouldn't have any!! ;) For the guys on the Drizunken forum!



3. This book is very boring. This book neither works as a biography nor as legal journalism.

   Raggio's life story is boring. Louise Raggio had a unremarkable and typical early 20th century life. The only exciting fact is that Grier Raggio her husband was accused of "unamerican activities" and was Lee Harvey Oswald's appointed attorney for several hours. Otherwise the stories of Louise Raggio growing up on a farm, going to college, getting her first job are tedious and without literary merit.

   As legal journalism, it is way too high level. There are no specific legislative stories, no landmark legal battles, no interesting legal cases. If Raggio revolutionized Texas family law it is not documented in this book.

   I would not recommend this book.




4. A must read for every woman and particularly for Texas women. A real eye opener to the legal position of women in Texas before the passage of the Family Law that is now the law in Texas. Such a spunky woman and a real role model for today's woman. Today's woman too often forgets how far we have come and the women who made this possible.

4 comments about Cardozo.

1. This is a book for laypeople and lawyers, rare in judicial biography. It is written in a clear and lucid prose, eschewing much of the current academic jargon. The author's years of work include many interviews with people now dead (and thus unavailable!), providing invaluable insights and perspectives into Cardozo's life and judicial influence. This work will be interesting to social historians, as well, for its treatment of the Nathan and Cardozo families' experiences in an evolving America.



2. Professor Kaufman presents his subject, first, as a man, establishing the personal background that shaped Cardozo's work as a judge. Kaufman then offers an insightful examination of the judicial work of Judge and Justice Cardozo, analyzing the development and maturation of Cardozo's thinking regarding the many legal principles which have become mainstays of American jurisprudence. The biography is well suited to lawyer and non-lawyer, and provides an extraordinary social history of the shaping of the American common law that governs our lives and liability today. This biography is a must-read primer for all soon-to-be law students, who will find in it an invaluable guide to the principles they are preparing to study. Professor Kaufman's honest analysis of the talents and faults of his subject is much to be commended.



3. Andrew Kaufman has written an engrossing account of the life of Benjamin Cardozo, a judicial hero of the first third of the century. This book should prove especially useful for first-year law students, who read many of Cardozo's most important decisions in their contracts and torts classes. But even non-lawyers with an interest in the legal system will find it highly readable and informative.



4. Professor Kaufman worked on this impressive biography of Benjamin Nathan Cardozo for over 35 years. There were times when one began to wonder if it would ever appear. Well, it did and it was worth the wait. This is a long book, running some 700 pages including notes. At times, it seems almost too detailed--but it is a wonderful resource for anyone interested in Cardozo, the development of American law, and the Supreme Court. Kaufman strikes a nice balance between BNC's private and public lives, his 18 year service on the New York Court of Appeals and his 5 or so terms on the Supreme Court, the biographical details one expects and the legal doctrines and opinions that he authored. Along the way, the author covers BNC's significant books; his involvement with the ALI; his work in developing key contract and tort concepts on the Court of Appeals; his long period as Chief Judge there; and his methods of working and drafting opinions while on the New York court.
   
   It is generally conceded that Cardozo's greatest contributions to the development of American law occurred on the CA and not during his service on the Supreme Court--he was the master common law judge rather than constitutional expert. So Kaufman devotes around 300 pages to Cardozo's service on that court. By contrast, around 100 pages are devoted to the Supreme Court and BNC's period in Washington. In fact, BNC does not get appointed until page 455. Cardozo found the Supremes a much less collegial body than the NY Court, in part because the justices were still doing the bulk of their work at home. Cardozo's views of state regulatory power and taxation, national regulatory power, court packing, and some civil liberties cases (such as Palko) are well addressed. Cardozo must have found it difficult to deal with colleagues such as Justice McReynolds and the other "four horsemen," but nonetheless he opposed FDR's court packing scheme.
   
   While Richard Polenberg's "World of Benjamin Cardozo" (also published by Harvard University Press) is itself a fine contribution, this is the most exhaustive study of Cardozo that we are likely ever to see. It is a masterful work, but one that requires persistence to get through. It is the book that BNC deserves.

2 comments about Judge Dave and the Rainbow People.

1. It's not every day that you read a book containing the full text of a consent agreement between parties to a health statute dispute and still find it very enjoyable. It's just as uncommon for a federal appeals court judge to write a book about the time he oversaw the peaceful assembly of thousands of middle-aged hippies in the woods of North Carolina. But that's what Judge Dave and the Rainbow People is about.

   The Rainbow People are not an organization as such. They're just whoever shows up around Independence Day each year at a place on federal land decided the year before. The people who show up are mostly baby boomer ex-hippies trying to relive the Summer of Love. They come by the thousands, get naked, and live in the woods for weeks. Invariably, the Forrest Service comes after them.

   In 1987 the Rainbow People converged on Nantahala Forrest in Western North Carolina. It wasn't long before the State tried to evict them under a sanitation law that was arguably unconstitutional. The case ended up before Judge Dave, who was a circuit court judge at the time.

   The result is an endearing account of how a conservative judge faced 15,000 decadent hippies (and at least one elephant), the ACLU, snarky law clerks, a ticking clock, and his own Senate confirmation to the D.C. Circuit in the background, and still managed to avoid catastrophe by avoiding a ruling on the law. Judge Dave is sincere and admits up front that this was one case where the results, and not the letter of the law, drove his decision. The alternative was a possible showdown between thousands of until-then peaceful gatherers and state troopers. I guess he made use of judicial discretion.

   Judge Dave got to visit the Rainbow camp a couple of times while he assessed the problem and later monitored the implementation of the agreement he brokered between the two sides. These visits account for much of the book and Judge Dave recounts them with a wonderful understated dry wit. "That weekend, July 4th occurred on Saturday as scheduled," he recalls in one part.

   You learn how tolerant Judge Dave is. Not in the modern meaning of the word, which holds that everyone's wonderful, but as originally defined: "to allow without prohibiting" even if one strongly disagrees. You also learn how truly peaceful the Rainbow People are and how this allowed tolerance to work. Finally, you learn that Judge Dave found himself staring at the naked ladies quite a bit!

   I would recommend this book, especially to lawyers, law students, and hippies (quite the niche). The only real critique I have is that at the end of the book, one of the Rainbow leaders shares his memories in 20 pages. I bet this was done to provide some sort of "equal time", but it doesn't add much and is actually a bit distracting. After finishing Judge Dave's hilarious and fair account of the gathering it's odd to go through a flat mini-review of what you just read. But hey, judge for yourself. Happy trails!




2. This book is, as President Teddy Roosevelt would say, DELIGHTFUL.
   For fellow judges, lawyers, and law students, it is a rare look into the judicial decision making process of a federal jusge. Judge Sentelle tells the story (laced with humour) of how he used appropiate judicial restraint and fairness to solve a complex civil case.
   As you follow his actions during the course of this case, you will see this judge exhibits humility, wisdom and common-sense judgment----virtues that all federal and state judges should have.
   Thanks, Your Honor, for an enjoyable and worthwhile book.

5 comments about Law Without Values: The Life, Work, and Legacy of Justice Holmes.

1. Oliver Wendell Holmes is a towering figure in our history, even if, like me, you only learned his name in school and only know he was a supreme court justice, or else he wrote books, didn't he? Or was that his Dad? But it turns out that what Holmes the justice thought is of crucial importance to key legal issues of today. Holmes can be seen as a major pragmatist thinker, and pragmatism can be seen as a major source of our current culture wars. I came across Holmes via Allan Bloom and, oddly, Edmund Wilson. I heard about Holmes' Civil War experiences and how he believed that the law is quote unquote only what men are willing to die for, and I was hooked, and looked around for a book that would best examine Holmes life, thought, and impact, and finally decided on this book by Alschuler. The book is thematic rather than chronological. And I don't think Alschuler argues very well. He tends to write impressionistically, and IMHO he indulges in smear tactics. For example, "Would you want to have Holmes as a friend?" But surely whether Holmes would make a good friend is irrelevant to the character of his thought. But Alschuler also manages to convey some of the wonderful issues at play in this arena for a non-lawyer such as myself. For me the book was like a window into an alien universe that I've actually been living in unknowingly all along. So I forced my way throught it. It's not long, less than 190 pages plus notes.



2. This book is extremely well written, thoroughly researched and possessing the profound perspective of a wise and intelligent writer exercising his science and art with a passion that can be felt just beneath the surface of cool academic analysis. This book is not only of interest to legal historians and philosophers of law, but to any reader wishing to take hold of the main threads which run through the cultural landscape of the modern world.



3. In his own day, Holmes was revered as the greatest, wisest judge in the English-speaking world. Today, however, Holmes' significance is downplayed in law schools across America, or he is trashed as he is in this book. The dramatic decline in Holmes' popularity and influence has resulted from his opinion in a single case, Buck v. Bell (1927), in which Holmes advocated sterilization of "imbeciles." Since the Holocaust, sterilization is understandably unpopular, especially among Jews, who dominate the faculties at America's top law schools and write many widely-used casebooks. Holmes, who wrote his opinion in Buck v. Bell long before the Holocaust, has been lumped into the Nazi camp (the Nazis tried to use Buck v. Bell at Nuernberg to defend their practices) by modern liberals, and many so-called "legal scholars" now dismiss Holmes' ideas without consideration and do not include his opinions in their casebooks. One of the central tenets of historiography is that it is improper to judge historical figures by the moral standards of today. Alschuler violates this principle again and again--excoriating a great mind because of the way its ideas were used by others. Compare this book to THE ESSENTIAL HOLMES, which is both scholarly and readable. It is also written by Judge Posner, an influential modern jurist respected by liberals and conservatives. Do your own reasoning, draw your own conclusions, and be fooled by no one.



4. The author might have explored Holmes's skepticism more, but he oddly leaves many questions open that he could have addressed. What values should drive the law? We are left wondering.



5. This book is meant as a polemic against Oliver Wendell Holmes, and in particular, how his skeptical worldview can seen in his decisions.

   Here's the thing: I, personally, like Holmes and actually quite admire his skeptical philosophy. So, much of what the author sees as Holmes's faults, I tend to see as his strenghts. The fact that he had no use for ideas of natural law and objective 'right answers;' the fact that he recognized (to my eyes) the reality that social life is an ongoing struggle of interest against interest; his view that rights are not naturally existing, self-evident things, but only have validity through positive law.

   There are two reasons I mention the chasm between what the author thought were strikes against Holmes, that I thought were points in Holmes' favor. First, this leads me to conclude that the this book 'preaches to the choir.' It will only convert the converted; if you dislike Holmes and the skeptical turn in law and society, you will like this book. If you admire Holmes and the skeptical turn he helped usher in, you will not be convinced here that you are wrong.

   The second reason I bring up the above chasm between mine and the author's take, is taht he really doesn't ARGUE so much as he might do something like simply say: "Holmes was a social darwinist who didn't see a grand purpose to life..." He simply assumes that the reader will addend the sentence with a tacit: "...and those traits are disgusting." There is even a chapter called "Would you have Wanted Holmes for a Friend?" which does exactly this: it points out the traits the author thinks are ugly about Holmes, and ASSUMES without further argument that the reader will concur. "Holmes was detached from having many friendships...[and wouldn't that be just like that sour old man. Hmmph!]" For my part, I wasn't convinced.

   The other criticism I have is that the last chapter - which allegedly shows that the skepticism Holmes has ushered in is still with us today - was about as close to a joke as an academic book can produce. The author goes on about teen pregnancy, the rising crime rates, and, yes, even the fact that Americans are runnning deficits. Apparently this all links back to Holmes. To say it bluntly, this chapter seemed so far afield and widely stretched that this nicely written academic book was capped off by a chapter straight out of Pat Robertson's 700 Club. Hmm...

   So there you have it: the book is good in that it is well-researched, clearly written and interesting as all get out. It is also one of the few books that really explores Holmes the philosopher as much as Holmes the Justice [see also The Essential Holmes, Posner, Richard (Ed.)] But if you are not a Holmes-hater before you go into this book, you will not be when you come out - and vice versa. For all the author's research and 'expose' of Holmes' personality, philosophy, and methods, he simply ASSUMES what he is supposed to prove: that Holmes is the villian the author says he is, and that these traits are the be-all end-all they are assumed to be.

No comments about Anything Your Little Heart Desires: An American Family Story.

5 comments about Ten Minutes from Normal.

1. No one should let this book escape perusal, especially at this reasonable price! You've heard that Karl Rove is "Bush's brain?" Well, Ms. Hughes is "Bush's brain on drugs (with a side of bacon)!"
   
   To read her describe Dubya's mind as "laser-like" leaves no doubt in my own mind that when she worked for Reagan, she was a conduit for Dubya on the "Star Wars - Strategic Defense Initiative" project. I don't remember if that was his pre-cocaine or post-cocaine years, but it all makes so much sense now.
   
   I'm happy that after a lifetime of one political success after another, she took time off from her busy schedule for a sabbatical to bake brownies for her young, hungry son. I wonder if perchance, she has a recipe for a cake with a file in it?
   
   Now that she's back on the team with her traveling road-show thumping America's generosity and love for the rest of the world, I suppose her son will go hungry, but at least America will be safe from those naughty terrorists! Praise da lard!



2. This is a very well written and absorbing insight into the lives and goings-on of our government. I could hardly put it down.



3. I really enjoyed reading this book! It is like having an inside look into the life of our president and some of the people who work closely with him. It is easy reading and very interesting. It is also very inspiring.
   
   Happy Reading!!!



4. I really enjoyed this book. It gives a good insight into a busy life of a politician..
   
   BEAWERE, Karen Hughes is a friend and a supporter of President Bush, so if you lack respect for the president you won't rate this book very high!



5. I highly recommend this book.
   The negative reviews here are obviously from those
   who have a different political position than the author.
   
   How sad some can't look past partisan politics to enjoy
   a book. FYI: There are talented people in BOTH parties
   & I find it inspiring to read about those who choose
   to use their considerable talents in service to their
   country and what they believe is best for it.

No comments about Democracy without Citizens: Media and the Decay of American Politics.

5 comments about Because Each Life Is Precious: Why an Iraqi Man Came to Risk Everything for Private Jessica Lynch.

1. Being a Shiite Moslem, Mr. Mohammed Odeh Al-Rehaief has been a first-hand witness to savagery throughout his life. In his home city of Nasiriya, he had been an attorney, and was a wealthy man whose extended family owned properties and businesses. Yet, this did not shield him from the corruption and brutality of Saddam Hussein's Iraq.

   Who would ever have imagined that an Iraqi citizen would knowingly risk losing everything, including his own life and the lives of his family, in order to save one soldier; a soldier whose country was then engaged in bombing his city to pieces. Here, however, we are forced to believe it, simply because we know that it is true.

   It has been pointed out that Mr. Al-Rehaief is given but brief mention in her own book, but the fact is that Pfc Jessica Lynch does express that she will be forever grateful to him. That she does not recall the events as he describes them should come as no surprise, since she was barely conscious of anything except pain during her captivity. By Pfc Lynch's own admission, it is unlikely that she would be alive today if it had not been for the efforts of this Iraqi civilian, and his success in reaching the US Marines, stationed outside the city as they continued their attack.

   Maybe it is through his family that we can glean some insight into the character of Mr. Al-Rehaief and where his strong moral values originate: As the book ends, the rest of his family, headed by his father, the son of a sheikh, are waiting in international limbo, not knowing what will happen to them next. They have lost everything. Yet I detect no sentiment of regret, complaint or accusation in their descriptions of the hardships caused by the loss of their entire way of life. Such unselfishness seems unfathomable, but again we are forced to believe it, simply because it is true.
   Who among us...?




2. This book is destined to be a classic, in several genres. If you start reading it, be sure you can afford the time to read it all the way through -- it's hard to set down. The opening is intense, yet the reader's hope that that level might be sustained is exceeded -- the story just keeps getting more gripping.

   It's an adventure story, history, humor, sociology, a spiritual journey, and a patriotic work all together (it'll make you proud to be an American).
   
   Mr. Al-Rehaief has done more single-handedly to redeem the Arab culture than all of the rest combined.




3. So many reviews seem to center around whether the events were true or not or with they agree with Lynch's account. (Their paths only cross for a matter of minutes in the book so I don't know how much there is to dispute. Only a 3rd party witness could confirm.) I can say about the book that...
   - It was hard to put down.
   - It was more about the author's life than her rescue. I enjoyed this intimate look at an Iraqi's family life as much as the rescue.
   - It seemed at times too fantastic to be true but that may be simply because my everyday life is a cozy one in America compared to the author's in Iraq.
   - Some of the atrocities are hard to read about. I don't think this would be appropriate reading for young children.



4. This book was an extraordinary look at the life of an Iraqi citizen and the trials he went through before he found JL in the hospital and what he and his family went through after. For those who don't think very highly of JL, you won't read much about her in here. It was a very fast read and hard to put down. Kudos to the author for putting his life and the lives of his entire family on the line to save an American life.



5. Five stars for bravado and shameless self-promotion. The Guardian reported on the astonishing faked rescue of Jessica Lynch as long ago as May 2003 [!] including the fact that military video producers based their made-for-TV "rescue" on the story line and production techniques in Jerry Bruckheimer's fictional "Black Hawk Down." That is, Jessica Lynch's "rescue" was in fact inspired by a movie. Wow. How stupid are we?
   
   It has been clear for nearly four years that Mr. Al-Rehaief's reward for his part in the staged rescue was asylum in the US and a big book contract. Hey--knowing how grim the situation in Iraq has become--how the American war has devastated civil society and led to a civil war--can you blame Mr. Al-Rehaief for grabbing a ticket out of a hell on earth?
   
   If I taught journalism classes, I would use this book as an example of how effectively governments have learned to use media to hoodwink citizens. Shameful, sad, and cynical--what a perfect document for the war in Iraq.