3 comments about The White House Physician: A History from Washington to George W. Bush.

1. This is a well crafted, researched and comprehensive treatise, yet it is an entertaining and fluid "read". I did not expect that the topic could be presented in such an interesting and entertaining manner. The book succeeded in educating me not only in the specifics of the various actors, but in the evolution of the roles and responsibilities of the President's physicians. I had assumed that the provision of medical care to the President had been static over the decades; it was fascinating to learn just how much and how recently it has changed. This book not only deals with presidential physicians, the evolution of presidential medical care (including political overlap), but also provides fascinating insights into presidential history.



2. 
   
   Ludwig Deppisch is a medical doctor who has an interest in medical history, and out of that interest he has given us a book that sets out the fascinating story of the doctors who, from the time of the founding of the republic up through the modern era, have served as physicians to the Presidents. This story is doubly fascinating because it not only traces the historical progress of medicine through time but it also reveals how medical practices, sometimes in conjunction with political subterfuge, can impact the presidency itself.
   
   The first part of the book, which covers the practices of the best doctors of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries - the doctors who treated Presidents - exposes the shortcomings of the medical profession in those years, even as medicine itself was becoming more professional. Thomas Jefferson wrote about his friend doctor Benjamin Rush, a greatly influential figure, that the doctor had "done much harm" with the practice of bleeding patients to treat illness. Indeed, calling on the aid of a doctor did not guarantee a cure; just the opposite could be the case. President James Garfield, who lived in a somewhat more advanced medical period, when shot by an assassin had his wound examined by doctors with hands so dirty that, according to the author, the doctors themselves likely caused his fatal infection. Still, a physically tough old President like Andrew Jackson could have a bullet removed from a dueling wound years after the duel and emerge much improved from the surgery.
   
   But it is as the story moves toward the twentieth century, while medical knowledge seems to be progressing, that we see another compelling issue begin to emerge, and that is how political and medical subterfuge can be employed to deceive the citizenry about what is going on in the health of a President. Grover Cleveland had a secret operation, for example, on board a private yacht, to remove a cancerous growth in his mouth. In the event the operation was a success and the public never became aware of what had taken place. Woodrow Wilson, however, had a stroke of such massive proportions that he probably should have left office but he did not. His physician was complicit in keeping Wilson isolated and the public misinformed about his true condition. FDR's health was so badly failing at the end of his third term that he should never have run for a fourth. But we were in the midst of war. His actual medical state was concealed and the reelected President died a short time into his last term. President Eisenhower had a series of serious medical problems which were interpreted to the public through rose tinted glasses. Never the less, Ike was popular, he completed two terms, and what Americans were told about the President's health likely gave them the reassurance most of them were looking for. Finally, it should be noted that JFK deliberately misrepresented his awful health facts to the American people throughout his political career with the audacity of Harry Houdini making an impossible escape. We might admire the audacity, but was it the right thing to do?
   
   The author also raises some related and interesting issues about using psychiatry as a tool both for evaluating the mental fitness of a President and as a mode of treatment. Hindsight suggests it might have been useful to know more about the mental health and psychological makeup of Richard Nixon before he was elected. But would it have been possible, we wonder, to get an objective and non political pre-election evaluation of Nixon's personality? By the same token, Senator Thomas Eagleton was forced off the Democratic ticket as a Vice Presidential candidate in 1972 when it was revealed he had been treated for serious depression. Was this action appropriate? And how would the American people react if they learned that a President was undergoing current psychiatric treatment? These are worthwhile questions to ponder.
   
   All of this leads us to note that there is some useful discussion in this book about the place of the Twenty-Fifth Amendment when it comes to dealing with the ramifications of any severe medical impairment of a President. And while this constitutional amendment was specifically passed to provide guidelines should a crisis occur, we have unfortunately seen, as in the shooting of President Reagan, that when a crisis does occur key officials can still be caught flatfooted in the immediate aftermath as to what to say and do. Moreover, the question of whether a President is medically fit to continue in office places the White House Physician squarely in the cross hairs of decision making. Thus, relevant officials in any new administration need to discuss and understand all of the protocols to be followed and all of the attendant constitutional and medical implications well in advance of any medical emergency. Deception of the public will probably no longer be tolerated as it has been in the past.
   
   Lastly we should note that, like a good novel, this tale contains some rich characters, strong personalities like Dr. Cary Grayson, Wilson's physician, who can color the story and influence the plot. And we see the potential for conflict when there are many doctors involved in treatment, a few of whom may have large egos. Kennedy had a wide range of treating doctors and his titular head physician, Dr. Travell, was shunted aside while the President received secret and controversial treatments from Max Jacobson, the Manhattan doctor known as "Doctor Feelgood" because of the injections he gave the rich and famous, injections that contained amphetamines and steroids.
   
   All in all, it would be fair to sum up that the author has given us a book that is not only rich in scholarship, but one that tells a tale which is fascinating on its own merits. Moreover, this is a book that is a significant resource of information for any doctors or officials who are newly being called to serve in an administration and who might have to grapple with a replay of history sometime in the future. For them it might be essential reading; for the rest of us it is just a darn good read.
   
   G. F. Shirley



3. Terrific! This is a thoroughly researched body of work. It contains great insights into the development of American medicine, and I highly recommend it to those interested in American and presidential history. Furthermore, its examination of legal, political, and moral issues make it a must-read for those in the medical profession.

5 comments about Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

1. It is indeed a shame that this book is not currently in print. I first listened to this book in audio format, and I am still impressed today. Ms. Noonan thoughts are intriguing and resonate within me. A good book for luxury reading, I highly recommend it.



2. For those enjoying Peggy Noonan, her thoughful essays of how her life evolved in the 1990's will be a delight.
   The topics are not especially political (although politicians are mentioned). The first part is about the lack of vision by Republicans that led to Clinton's election. The later essays, however, are mainly about personal transition, including that of being a single parent and returning to spiritual values.
   Much of this mirrors the evolving lives of the baby boomers as they grow up: the real story that occured quietly and behind the scenes and not in the flashier stories on the 1990's.
   However, those who are allergic to discussions of religion will probably hate it, as will those who hate Peggy Noonan for her political history.



3. I love Peggy Noonan but this was not her best book. It has wonderful scenes, fantastic chapters and is so good in places and then she seems to get lost and goes on and on with fairly boring stuff. I can only assume that it was unedited. Also, she tends to play the wide eyed innocent too much. This woman worked in the White House and lives in NYC-- you can't survive in either place and still be a babe in the woods. The scene where she goes to Jack Kemp's party and behaves like a yokel was pure smaltz and sacarhine. It was laid on too thick--like a pool of jello and I didn't believe it. What I Saw at the Revolution was a much better book and it's one I go back to again and again. I'm chalking this one up to the fact that every writer has a bad literary day sooner or later.



4. It takes a while to adapt to Noonan's "New Yorkish, post-modern, stream-of-consciousness" style, but once you adjust it's fun. The whole book isn't that way, just large sections. Evidently that is the style designed to capture people brought up with short attention spans. If you expect a former presidential speech writer to have a gift of eloquence, you're not disappointed in Peggy Noonan. Her observations cause you to say "yeah, that's right" as she points out things you hadn't really considered.

   Noonan has lived the examined life, but in writing of one of her former employers (Ronald Reagan) she observed that the unexamined life actually IS worth living, contrary to the ancient philosopher's assertion. In this book, Noonan asks herself, as her readers peer into her private thoughts: "What do I want my life to mean? What do I want the obit to say, what do I want for the lead?"

   A similar observation is found in her comparision between individual giftings. On a social acquaintance she writes, "He thinks intelligence is a virtue when of course, it's not, virtue is a virtue, intelligence is a gift."

   She reminds us of the reality that Christianity is really for rebels. When society accepts it and tries to package it; it loses it's authenticity. Christians historically have been falsely accused, murdered, gone underground, and regardless of what pagans do to destory their faith, it grows stronger all the time. So she's not overly concerned that the social structure doesn't accept it. She says it helps it maintain its authenticity. After all Jesus Himself predict should treatment for His followers.

   You'll like this book if you're interested in both personal reflection and glimpses of cultural change. She combines macro and micro analyses in a colorful flow. Like a world class communicator should, she keeps the audience engaged




5. In her characteristically insightful and observant style, Noonan--a former Reagan speech writer and Catholic convert--surveys the social, cultural, political, and spiritual essence of the 1990's.
   
   She captures, explains, and critiques that tumultuous decade in a way no one else can. Noonan is one of my personal heroes and this title, more than any other, captures the wisdom that makes her so inspiring. The writing is a little uneven from one chapter to the next, but somehow it all works. If you're a fan of her columns, you will absolutely enjoy this.
   
   Recommended.

5 comments about In the Arena: In the Arena.

1. Since the former president granted my request and sent me a personal autographed copy absolutely free I am biased about this book. I think it is well-written, insightful, personal, and philosophical all in one package. His approach to life was essentially life it to the hilt, have something to show for your existence, hence the title. He was not hesitant to enter "the arena." In fact, his life was lived in the arena. President Nixon was both a thinker and doer.

   While he lived adventurously on two levels, the mental and physical, he was somewhat neglectful of the spiritual arena. He talks about his Christian parents, especially his mother, but he doesn't address spiritual matters in his personal life in any great detail. I know he was on friendly terms with both Billy Graham and Norman Vincent Peale. I'm sure they had some Christian influence on him.

   In this book, the president looks back on life as an elder statesman. Some of the advice he gives is pertinent to any arena. When he talks about living with a purpose that transcends self, the focus is beyond political. He devotes time to the human condition, overcoming personal challenges, victories, defeats, and renewals. This is a well-thought out book. Any open minded reader would be stimulated by it.




2. First of all, I began this book after reading his "No More Viet Nams" which was top notch. Needless to say, I was a bit disappointed with "In The Arena". Nixon covers much about his life in politics and gives us his personal views on life, his wife, family, friends, television, books, and so on. Reading this book was much like listening to your favorite, wise, ol' grandad talking about his life and what he experienced. IF you are not interested in that, don't read this book. You'll be disappointed. Personally, I was more interested in his pointed comments about politics, foreign policies, political leaders, war, and so on but there wasn't enough of that.



3. An autobiographical account is always a dicey proposition, and in order to succeed, the author requires a certain amount of objectivity, as well as superior writing skills. Unfortunately, this displays neither.
   
   I'm not here to bash Nixon politically, but I do have to say that the book comes off as extremely self-serving. Nixon's account of Nixon's life just doesn't come off as honest. I think that when he wrote it, he was still too entrenched in a persona that needed to take public opinion into account. The result is a lot of treacly, ponderous prose that comes off like the presidential equivalent of a Hallmark television special.
   
   The one saving grace of the book is that it gives us many little anecdotes that demonstrate the minutiae of the daily life of a President of the United States, and that is indeed interesting. But other than that, there's no reason to pick this up.



4. This books tells you very interesting things about Politics and Life in general. Definitely, Richard Nixon was a very intelligent man.
   
   Something I find fascinating and mysterious is that the most intelligent President of USA has been the only one to be dismissed, the one who obtained one of the most landslide victory of USA's electoral history (1972) and the one who had more enemies in the Press.



5. Why is it pleasurable to read this book ? Because you have the impression of sitting with former President Nixon having him telling you his experience as a politician, truly revealing, with simple but skilled language, anedoctes of his life and his mind about a lot of topics.
   I really enjoyed having this presidential chat with President Nixon and every once in a while I will surely have some other ones by reading some passages of " In the Arena", a memoir narrated not in chronological order, but according to certain matters he deals with.

5 comments about Their Lives: The Women Targeted by the Clinton Machine.

1. Listen to an exclusive interview with Candice E. Jackson Live by She Unlimited Magazine http://www.sheunlimited.com
   
   Candice E. Jackson Sets forth our mission and vison. This interview will shed some light on the books mission and points that author this book.
   
   It was an honor!!!



2. While purportedly written about a group of women who allege atrocious treatment by Bill Clinton, this screed by a fringe journalist from a fringe publisher instead focuses on an indictment of liberalism.
   
   The "facts" for the accusations of felonies against the 42nd president stem from the chiefly uncorroborated accounts of the several women. How could anyone so brutally raped with a mangled lip from a bite as Juanita Brodderick claims not have taken photographs and had a physician collect semen samples? Certainly the U.S. Department of Justice's Civil Rights Office in a Republican administration would have listened to her and pursued a criminal investigation if state authorities would not have.
   
   These women could have secured legal representation, even if funded by arch conservatives as was Paul Jones' counsel, to pursue civil damages.
   
   The author's extreme right-wing credentials are clearly demonstrated by her education and experience. If these terrible allegations were true, they would be more powerfully presented by a mainstream journalist.
   
   What's lower than an Amazon rating of one star? One can't give it here.



3. Candice E. Jackson is a lawyer who worked for Judicial Watch, an organization whose founding principles appear to include drowning the the court system with a blizzard of lawsuits against the Clintons.



4. Oh, Liberals don't lie? Only Republicans lie? Put your hippie pot smoking BS out the window. Liberals lie too. LBJ lied to the American people about Vietnam and he was a dumocrat, ooops democrat, I keep getting those two mixed up.



5. Excellant read - verifies much of what many with half a skull already knew or suspected - all the more reason to "Let Lying Dogs Sleep!!!"

No comments about Telling Political Lives: The Rhetorical Autobiographies of Women Leaders in the United States (Lexington Studies in Political Communication).

5 comments about Feasting on the Spoils: The Life and Times of Randy "Duke" Cunningham, History's Most Corrupt Congressman.

1. Great work Seth Hettena! I really enjoyed reading this book. I lived in San Diego during the "Duke" era and was shocked when all of this corruption scandal unfolded. Seth did a great job in describing the events of this crime. He also paints a very different picture of the "Duke" we all knew. The great Vietnam fighter ace was able to defeat his enemy, but was not able to fight off his own addiction to fame, money and status.
   
   It was very clear to me after reading this book how our culture of materialism and consumerism has gotten out of control. The "Duke" got caught up in this and loses site of what is important in life and his purpose as a father, husband and congressional representative. Seth paints a very clear picture of a man caught up in his own ego unable to distinguish right from wrong. This book reminded me about the frailty of human beings and the necessity to show how bad it can get when we lose site of our purpose. This timely book should not only be a must read for every politician....but everyone.



2. The author, in a very vivid language, tells us a lot about what is happening in Washington.
   I wish every American could read this book to realize what really is happening to our tax dollars because of all the political corruption that exists.



3. "Spoils" paints not only an amazing story of corruption but a fascinating character study in how the sense of entitlement and greed can take over the human spirit. You really can't make this "cast of characters " up and the story reads like an unbelievable true-crime novel.
   
   The other scary part is, Duke and his "friends" really didn't try to hide any of their corrupt actions and it went unchecked for years. It makes you think what our "smart" politicians are doing to keep their secrets from coming out?



4. After the Bush years are over and those Congressmen and lobbyists who have benefited from their party's patronage go to jail, (1994 was the real year of inception with the GOP takeover of Congress) it will be interesting to see who is left standing. Certainly not among them is Randy "Duke" Cunningham, the pride of the air war in Vietnam. Pin a medal to his chest and watch his life unfold.
   
   Duke Cunningham should never have gotten even remotely high up in power as he did. Author Seth Hettena paints a "not so glorious" view of the man who came to represent the beginning of the downfall of ethics problems in Congress over the past years. Cunningham was neither cunning so much as he was a ham. His mouth got him into constant trouble and the author points out how easily a man with war hero credentials, given to emotion rather than reason and easily bought, is otherwise reduced to pulp on a national scene. At least retiring Senator Larry Craig makes Cunningham look good.
   
   Hettena's narrative is better at the ends. The initial sting operation to get Cunningham bookended by the eventual outcome is told in gripping manner. The author knows how to write. Yet, the middle of the book sags under the weight of facts and figures. The case against Cunningham is made, but to say that he is the "most corrupt Congressman" in Washington? Ever? Certainly Tom DeLay will receive that mantle. Or others about whom we don't know. It's still early.
   
   Seth Hettena's book is good, but not great. It fills in some pieces along the corruption puzzle line and a title less blaring would have made for a more solid read. I hope this talented author writes another book about Congressional life in Washington before long. Go higher up, this time!



5. Our country is in trouble. Big trouble. The amount of greed and corruption that is being allowed to run amuck these past seven years is staggering. With all of the terror mongering going on, many will turn the other way not wanting any more bad news. Do not make that mistake.
   
   Hettena has masterfully taken a complex, convoluted and just plain confusing history and woven a fascinating and comprehensible story which helps us understand not only what happened in the case of Randy "Duke" Cunningham and his contractor cronies, Wade and Wilkes, but skillfully illuminates the reasons why.
   
   Perhaps some of you will say they're unethical - so what? The amount of corruption and the web of complicity throughout our government and industry have reached record breadth and depth. It will not improve until the American public pays attention, understands, and demands that it be stopped. Each of us has a part in this drama. A good place to start is reading this book.

5 comments about Tony Blair: The Making of a World Leader.

1. As author Philip Stephens notes, many Americans who saw British prime minister Tony Blair all buddy-buddy with his close friend and philosophical soulmate Bill Clinton were surprised to see Blair in apparently an equally close relationship with George W. Bush just a few months later. Other Americans may simply have wondered who this man was who became Bush's closest ally in the run-up to war in Iraq and his guest during an address to Congress.

   Either way, this biography has many of the answers those Americans may be looking for. While it is not the definitive biography of Anthony Charles Lynton Blair -- and it's obviously too early to measure his impact on UK politics, since he's still in office -- this title is nevertheless a good introduction to this major player on the world stage.

   Stephens, a writer for the Financial Times newspaper, has had a great deal of access to Blair over the years, including personal interviews specifically for this book. It's not entirely surprising, therefore, that Stephens takes a generally positive tone with his subject. While he does not downplay Blair's weaknesses, including a number of unattractive personality traits, neither is he heavily critical of the man. He also tends to be light in his coverage of others' criticisms of Blair, except insofar as they have shaped the man himself or had a lasting impact on his political outlook or success in office.

   No question that this book is more about personality than politics ... but I hasten to add that I think Stephens has done a fine job in showing how Blair's political words and deeds proceed consistently and logically from his personality and his underlying beliefs. Unlike Clinton, Blair does seem to have a solid set of core principles that transcend mere political expedience. Stephens argues that this in part explains Blair's ability to get along with President Bush on matters of global policy. At the same time, Blair is also a consummate and accomplished politician, who recognizes (again, as Stephens argues) that the British prime minister ultimately has little alternative *except* to do all he can to keep the UK's relationship with the US on solid footing, regardless of who is in the White House.

   In short, this title may seem a bit too glossy and superficial to Americans who already have some degree of familiarity with British politics and Tony Blair himself. However, for those who don't, or who seek a quick refresher course, Stephens' book has a lot to argue for it. I consider myself relatively conversant with the UK's politics and government, but still learned a lot from reading this. I think other readers may find themselves reaching the same conclusion.




2. If you want to know why the British prime minister went to war with the US then read this well-written and insightful biography of a great world leader. Stephens produces an elegant account of the personal beliefs, strategic calculations and straightforward loyalty that kept the UK alongside the US in a time of danger. The biography is stylishly-written and full of original material



3. I read Philip Stephens' column each time it appears in the Financial Times' editorial page. Readers of that space will have realized that Stephens' has good access to Tony Blair, his inner circle and the workings of British government. As such, this book - a quick, worthhwhile read - is a good primer for the U.S.-based reader in gaining insight as to how that system of government works.
   
   In terms of painting the picture of how Blair and team (and mostly Blair, by the way) made its way towards partnership with the US in the actions in Iraq, there's a better source: Peter Stothard's "Thirty Days" is by far the better insider's view of that process. However, Stothard's book is emphatically not a biography. So, if you want insights on the roots and rise of Tony Blair - especially vis-a-vis his complex relationship with PM-in-waiting Gordon Brown - Stephens' book will suit you fine. [Although Stephens' himself goes on to suggest other sources that cover specific topics better than he, most notably James Naughtie's "The Rivals," which covers the Blair/Brown saga in splendorific detail.]
   
   A couple of annoying editing mistakes are worth noting. Inner-circle confidant Alastair Campbell is repeatedly called 'Alistair.' I fault the editors here - this is a main character (he dominates "Thirty Days"). Sure, 'Alastair' is a non-conventional spelling, but the man deserves to have his name spelled correctly. Also, Spainard Javier Solana - head of NATO at the time of that organization's actions in Kosovo - becomes Xavier Solana. Charo was apparently unavailable for comment.



4. I have never visited the moon but then I know that the moon exists. Similarly I have never read this book but I know that it will contain so many lies (perhaps 'untruths' is a nicer-sounding word). For many British people the election of Blair initially gave the hope of a new life in British politics after so many years of Tory rule. They had naively expecteded that a politician coming from the Labour party would restore justice and fair play - but their hopes were betrayed. Not only did Blair continue Thatcher's policy of destroying one of the greatest welfare systems in the world ( thereby making the rich even richer and the poor even poorer) but he also continued her war-mongering policies with even more zeal. He has not only attacked old age pensions, social security and the national health service (once even better than in Scandinavia but now similar to America), but he has also exposed British people worldwide to actual terrorist threats (threats which hitherto had never existed).
   I would not like to spend money on a book such as this so that a portion of the royalties would end up in Tony Blair's already bulging pockets; and with this money he could no doubt enjoy another holiday prancing about on a tropical island while so many people in Iraq are still being killed every day. Not having read this work, I would like to say that my rating of one star is no slur on the talent of the biographer (nor can I say that his treatment of Mr. Blair is partial or flattering). However, I am sure that the biographer is reporting what his subject WANTS him to say. I wonder whether this book will provide real unprevaricative answers such as the real truth behind the circumstances of Dr. Kelly's death. I also doubt whether Mr. Blair will provide an adequate explanation as to why a British subject was left to die a barbaric death by being beheaded without his prime minister's intervention (even though that poor man and his family had begged Mr. Blair to save his life). I wonder how many other superficial issues there might be in the book - all of which will serve just to divert attention from the real issue - why did Mr. Blair pretend to the British public that he had actual proof that there were nuclear weapons in Iraq?
   A related question which I would not expect to see asked (let alone answered) in this biography is whether his actions really showed the work of a friend. A friend of America is not just someone who ingratiates himself with the leaders of the country, but someone who REALLY cares for the wellbeing of the good and decent American people themselves, especially for all the young heroes who willingly went to give their lives believing (as they were told) that they were doing so to help their country (and paid far less than the employees sent to Iraq to reconstruct the oil industry). A friend is not someone who is always a fawning follower and a servile 'yesman'. A real friend is someone who is sincere and points out the truth. Two years ago he had the opportunity to offer his American counterpart the advice of a real friend. If such advice had been taken then thousands of innocent people would still be alive today.



5. My first book about Blair was "Thirty Days" by Peter Stothard. That book was about a short time period before the Iraq invasion but it got me interested. Also I read Gerry Adam's book "A Farther Shore" and he describes his interaction with Blair. So I was ready to read a Blair biography. I would say this book is good and explains the basics of Blair's career and what makes him tick. So it was good to read but I would say it rates 4 stars. It is not a barn burner or an epic story, but it is a solid job. It is only 250 pages long and skips many things but it covers the basics.
   
   The author Philip Stephens is well qualified to write this book having been a long time journalist and associate editor at the Financial Times. He has known Tony Blair since Blair was a junior Treasury spokesman for Labour Party in the early 1980's and the author has followed Blair's upward career for 20 years keeping in close contact.
   
   One might assume as I did that this might be a flattering or even a fawning portrayal of Tony Blair. But I think it is fair to say that the book is neutral. It is clearly not nasty or overly negative and if the author had that attitude he would never have been able to interview Blair dozens of times as he claims to have done over a twenty-year period.
   
   In short, I was a bit surprised by the book. It is better than I had hoped; it is a solid and well-crafted biography of a complicated person. The author had access to Blair over decades, he has interviewed many of Blair's old friends and associates, and clearly this is an excellent and well researched book by an outstanding journalist. It explains his half Scottish and half Irish roots, his education, his days at Oxford, his first legal job where he met Cherie, his first contacts with Labour, his first seat as an MP, etc. The book manages to touch on all his main career segments and explain how he has progressed step by step, adapting, learning, grasping power, holding onto power, trying to transform his ideas into action, etc. I did find one interesting aspect and that was how he developed his philosophy on supporting Bush. I recently read Zbigniew Brzezinski's book "The Choice" and many of those ideas are similar to Blair. As a result of the war in Kosovo (and Sierra Leone) Blair concluded that other than France and Britain, the EU was essentially helpless in any military conflict and the relation with the US and later Russia was the key to achieving world peace. For that reason he strongly supported US involvement in Kosovo and later backed Bush in Iraq, and continues to support close US-EU ties, and then expanding those ties.
   
   In any case, this is an interesting book and is highly recommend reading as are the other three books that I mentioned..

No comments about Never Too Late: A Memoir.

No comments about A Life in Transition.

5 comments about Ol' Strom: An Unauthorized Biography of Strom Thurmond.

1. In Ol' Strom, Bass and Thompson tell the whole story of Senator J. Strom Thurmond's remarkable march across 20th century politics. But they don't do anything else. While it is interesting just to read about a politician so long-lasting that he ran for president in 1948 and still holds office today, the book does not attempt to delve into the meaning of Thurmond's extraordinary tenure. Thurmond's political career is a mirror of the evolution of the South from Dixiecrat to Republican, from racist to mainstream conservative. The authors opted not to tell this story, however, and stubbornly insisted on offering just a journalistic account of Thurmond's life.



2. I once had the pleasure of sharing a flight with the author Jack Bass. The man is a walking encyclopedia of anecdotes of South Carolina history and political lore and he was quite entertaining. Reading his take on Thurmond, who he knew well, is similar to an actual conversation with Bass. Put it to you this way, reading this book is like listening to some old-timers reminisce around the cracker barrel in front of the general store. Not a scholarly work,but an enjoyable one. BTW, I wish he would have gone into detail about Thurmond''s meeting with Coretta Scott King. I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall to hear what the former supreme segregationist had to say to the widow of Dr. King.



3. Insightful, provacative...You may not like Strom, but this book
   will make you view him in a different light. This book doesn't take sides. It does give you a view of someone many have thought of as a not very bright, but who has outlived or outsmarted most of his critics. A very good view of politics in South Carolina. Mr. Thurmond won my grudging respect in this book by taking care of his constituents...without regards to race or religion. Well documented facts by the writers!



4. Strom Thurmond is widely viewed as a simple racist with just one cause- to fight against civil rights. However, OL STROM helps to explain that while Strom was historically on the wrong side during the civil rights battles, he was and still is a man of character and integrity.

   Like him or not,OL STROM makes a strong case to support Strom as "the century's most enduring American political figure". Strom Thurmond was on the cutting edge of the white souths move from the Democratic party to the Republican party with his 1948 presidental bid. He still holds the filibuster record and well being in the Senate for longer than any one in history.

   Unlike some of of the hardcore racists, Strom reached out to African-Americans in his later years. At the same time, Strom never "admitted" his earlier positions on civil rights were wrong. Strom still clung to his "States Rights" view which seem to open the only hole in his intergrity. Only Strom knows what's in his heart.

   OL STROM also gets into more details, regarding his personal affairs, such as his biracial daughter, that others bio have glossed over.

   Strom is not so much "a" southern politian, as he IS the south!




5. Myself and other progressive young southerners who were previously appalled by his well-known Segregationist tactics could not have even imagined Strom Thurmond himself fathering an interracial child, only to gleefully keep his family and other in racial subordination supposedly for their and/or country's own good.

   Sure, I was previously aware of slave-owner-slave stories which basically told the same tale in eighteenth century language, but I did not believe somebody intentionally kept their family in segregation today. There has been much discussion about conscience, character, and morals within the public sector and what quantities of these ingredients are required of 'good' public servants versus those that simply keep getting re-elected for tradition sakes---but Thurmond's life (long overdue for an examination) lacks all three components.

   After former South Carolina Senator Strom Thurmond's death, a woman Essie Mae Washington came forward with revelation that she was Thurmond's half-daughter. Her mother was a teenage African American worker in the Thurmond home, and he was a wealthy young adult whose activities were apparently concealed for fear of dominant society retaliation. If word of Thurmond's 'extracurricular' activities had leaked out while he was living, (especially in the segregation era) it would have been the end of his political career.

   I don't doubt that the incident (and others) in question happened, or Strom's legendary libido (ironically while courting voters from 'family values' crowd who made a national crisis out of President William Jefferson Clinton's consensual affair with a twenty something adult woman). Apparently because Ol'Strom forces himself on women far less powerful than himself, this is not only appropriate conduct but an expected public service perk that he was not in a hury to give up. Throughout his 'distinguished' life, Thurmond regarded women as objects for his convenience and entertainment, unable to consider us full and three-dimensional people.

   I am not shocked by the lurid details contained within this volume, but I sincerely hope conservatives and/or Republicans understand what allegations are in here before continuing to pretend only one political party houses ravenous libidos. Letting neither his switch to the Republican party or increasing age stop him, Strom remained the consummate womanizer, quickly falling out of step with an era that (at least in public relations) saw the importance of treating women as professional equals.

   Thurmond's death was one of the 2003 newstories, but it is ultimately telling of his supreme inhumanity that none of the Sunday talk shows devoted significant time to memorializing his influence on the nation. Good riddance!!