No comments about The Furniture of My Mind: Collected Essays.

No comments about On the Edge of Greatness: The Diaries of John Humphrey, First Director of the United Nations Division of Human Rights, volume 1, 1948-1949.

No comments about Hermit with Landscape (Yale Series of Younger Poets).

No comments about My Savage Ancestor.

1 comments about Justice William J. Brennan, Jr: Freedom First.

1. I must begin this review by admitting my biases. No, I am not related to David Gallen. Roger Goldman, however, did teach me constitutional law at St. Louis University during Justice Brennan's service on the Supreme Court.

   Justice Brennan was one of the longest serving justices on the Supreme Court, serving from his appointment by President Eisenhower in 1956 until his retirement in 1990. A member of the New Jersey Supreme Court before his nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court, Brennan became one of the court's consistently liberal justices during his 34 year tenure.

   This book is in no way a biography of William J. Brennan, Jr., although some biographical details do work themselves into the narrative. This book is an exposition of the judicial legacy of this very important justice of the twentieth century.

   This book is organized into three sections. The first section contains tributes to Brennan from others who have known him, primarily his former clerks. Section II contains a summary of the judicial positions which Brennan championed in his opinions. Section III contains a collection of Brennan's most important opinions.

   This book is a worthwhile read, whether you are a fan of Justice Brennan or whether you see him as an activist justice run amuck. His fans will revel in his judicial literature. Strict constructionists will find justification for criticism of his kind in the pages of this book. All will notice his shift from an intellectual mainstay of the liberal Warren Court, to a sometime dissenter and sometime majority builder on the Burger Court to his role as a frequent dissenter on the Rehnquist Court, who still packed the punch necessary to bring an occasional majority to his thinking. When he failed to persuade the majority he left his dissents for liberals who he knew would follow later.

   Read and enjoy.

No comments about Sherman Minton: Indiana's Supreme Court Justice.

5 comments about Hillary's Choice (Random House Large Print (Paper)).

1. This book really has nothing to do with Hillary or the Clintons -- it has everything to do with Gail Sheehy - her mean-spiritedness, her willingness to gossip, her jealousy, her arrogance, her pain. This book is not good journalism -- not recommended for anyone to read.



2. Believe it or not, I am one of the few in the country that is not intimately familiar with all of the scandals of the Clinton presidency. I had hoped that, in reading this book, I would understand a little bit more in depth what had happened to have the nation in an uproar and gain some valuable insights to Hillary Clinton. Unfortunately, the bias is so evident in this book that I know that I do not have a complete picture as to what actually happened.

   In Ms. Sheehy's eyes, Clinton is a proverbial villian and she just assumes everyone else feels the same way too. While she could still present her case against him and not interfere with the integrity of the story, she takes every opportunity to make jibes and call him names. It is hardly objective to call him a philanderer incessantly - whether he is or not. However, the main problem with this attitude is that she lets this get in the way of reporting the evidence fairly. For instance, she makes reference to the stories of the State Trooper's quite frequently. She is overly eager to use their stories against Bill when it concerns his affairs. However, when the same sources indicate that there was an affair with Vince Foster by Hillary, she refutes their legitimacy. Then she goes on to refer to their allegations against Bill, seeming to forget that they also made allegations against Hillary. Which is it? Were they really discredited? Were parts discredited? If so, what parts and how? If they were discredited, why include a remark from an alarmed Bill Clinton to the effect that the AR governor should not be upset because he controls the state police? This only legitimizes their stories which gets us back to, so what's the deal with Vince Foster? As you can see, this book left me with many more questions than were answered.

   While I do have a clearer picture of Hillary Clinton, the picture painted of her while in the White House, gives me serious reservation about how she would act if she was actually the President. If this book's assertion that there was really nothing to hide is true, it means that Ms. Clinton can not be trusted to be forthcoming when she believes that the hand is being called - even if she knows she has a winning hand. It would have made more sense to lay out the evidence against her and then give her argument as to specifically why she was withholding evidence. Maybe I could have seen myself doing the same thing if faced with the same situation but this is presented as a woman's grudge against the media for no justifiable reason. Of course, she also nevers really hits the question as to whether records were withheld by Mrs. Clinton. She spends a few paragraphs on the possible reasons an administrative assistant might not come forward with a box if she had been asked to find it and, not finding it, found it under her desk months later. After spending almost a hundred pages on her early life and college years, couldn't we spare a few to address the questions that would undoubtedly be brought up by events during the presidency? It simply doesn' hold water in my opinion. People have to have a reason for doing what they do. Especially people with advisors.




3. I have had the dubious pleasure of reading and rereading quite a number of works addressing the life and times of Hillary Clinton.
   While I am not a great fan of Billie, I must admit to sort of an admiration for Hillary. Be-that-as-it-may, I enjoyed this book. It was well written and I thought pretty well ballanced. Many of the "facts" presented, will have to be tested by time, but for now, I feel they are probably as close to the truth we will get.
   Ms Clinton is certainly one of the more fascinating individuals of our times and I am quite sure history will continue to judge her as such. She is an interesting subject. In many ways, she is us. The author of this book is an interesting writer and between the author and the subject, we get a very interesting story. Thank you Ms Gail for writing it.



4. Read this book and you will understand why Bill and Hillary act as they do. ..... This book is much better than Hillary's fictional account of her life, "Living History". ..... "Hillary's choice is not to know what she knows." ..... A very enlightening account. ...... A "must read".



5. I must really confess that I can,t stand either women, either the author or the Clinton.
   When in college I was forced to read the Rhetoric by Aristotle.Thank goodness, he went on and on and on about how a speaker must first establish her/his reputation and give reasons why she/he should be listened to.
   Isn,t this the same Gail Sheehey who plagarized (read stole) important parts of her first novel Passages from a UCLA Psychiatry professor who was doing research on the subject.She settled out of court wisely, gave the good Dr. some dough, and must have laughed all the way to the bank.That was a long time ago and like Hilary she thought "wow, I can steal a lot of good stuff, not use some of it, pay the guy off and make a fortune." She has churned out book after book,none very good.She should have gone into politics in another country.Obviously, i was biased against the book but tried hard, really, to see if it had many redeeming qualities.
   There is a great deal of factual information about Hilary, her childhood, her relationship with BIll but the interpretations of why she is motivated to do such and such are pretty shabby. I am a psychiatrist and find her attempts at divining both CLinton,s adult personalities from their childhood truamas pathetic guesswork by an amateur. I dont, think the Clinton,s can really stand each other, has anyone seen ANY genuine affection between them for all the time they,ve been on the world stage?They stay together for political and financial reasons and both seem to have very small conscienses while now both getting filthy rich.
   Too be totally fair, some parts of the book are very interesting about many factual occurences Mrs.Clinton background but it didn,t change my mind about the author or the politician.

No comments about When a Judge Can't Judge - Part Two (The Conclusion).

No comments about Pakistan Mein Aamriat aur Jajoon ka Kirdar: (Testament of a Liberal).

5 comments about Nineteen Seventy-Five: A Year in the Life of a College Sophomore : Taking it Apart (Part 1).

1. THis is a fantastic voyage back to the sex, drugs and rock and roll '70's experience on a small college campus. Mr. Small has nailed the experience, and I felt transported back to that time by the book. If you've forgotten what it was like, or if you're just curious, I strongly recommend this book.



2. This book is a great read. The characters really come to life . I felt like they were my friends. Anyone who came of age in the seventies can truly relate to the situations the main character encounters in those strange times. The book made me want to relive those days again. I can't wait for Mr. Smalls next novel.



3. After reading Nineteen-Seventy-four I could't wait to read the next book. Who would have thought it could have even been better. I felt even more connected to the main character in the second book and found myself hoping he'd get it together. Please keep on writing Mr. Small.



4. Having gone to a small midwestern college during the same period I found this book all too familar. For me, the 70's were an interesting time of both exploration and rebellion. I thought this novel explored both the pain and the joy of the times bringing back memories and feelings I had not visited in many years. I would reccommend this book to anyone but the most right wing. I loved it.



5. In a literary era of tales of survival under physical extremes, 1975 is a Dickensian tale of psychic survival. Unlike Dickens however, Small's account is realistic, and some may find this hard to face. Ask yourself, what would have happened if I had been raised by people who were unable to love me but merely treated me as boarder, and who treated my accomplishments as threats or insults to their own biological offspring, who tried to drag me down to mollify their own egos? Would I become a well-adjusted young man respectful of authority and without a trace of bitterness like David Copperfield, or would I laugh at social convention, take drugs, and learn to make authority cringe?
   
   On a different level, this story will appeal primarily to all those who harbor contempt for authority; those who lived in nonconformist frat houses in the 70s; anyone who has hitchhiked very much around America; those who attended "DeForrest" or similar small colleges and are familiar with the sociopolitics; and those familiar with the cultural desert of small town Indiana and the wacky things that intelligent people do there to preserve their sanity.
   
   From a nostalgic viewpoint, it's an excuse to remember what it was like to be alive then, to walk down the halls of your old frat house or dorm and revisit the strange assortment of characters you knew there, remember what it was like to get high for the first time and how good all the music sounded, and the awkwardness and then euphoria of your first sexual fumblings. You know, the fun parts of growing up.
   
   On the down side, while the author's savant-like recall of infinitesimal detail is amazing, it sometimes detracts from the flow of the narrative. Nevertheless, the story will leave you with unforgettable images, some hilarious (that second floor toilet), others disturbing (the fight on the roof, goodbye Eva). I look forward to the next installment.