5 comments about Churchill: Visionary. Statesman. Historian..

1. John Lukas clearly states at the beginning of his short book that his collection of essays is neither a biography nor a scholarly study of Winston Spencer Churchill (pg. xiii). Therefore, potential readers of Lukas' book who do not know anything about the key milestones in the life and career of Churchill should not start here. These readers can read books such as "Churchill a Life", "Churchill a Study in Greatness", "Clementine Churchill The Biography of a Marriage", "Winston and Clementine The Personal Letters of the Churchills" or "The Wit & Wisdom of Winston Churchill" to fill in the most glaring gaps in their knowledge of Churchill for that purpose.

   Lukas writes to the attention of an audience who has an unquenchable thirst to know more and more about an individual who remains a source of inspiration to many men and women who stand in the way of barbarity and illiberalism around the world.

   Although Lukas is generally sympathetic to Churchill, he is not blind to his major shortcomings: impetuosity, impatience, stubbornness and fancifulness (pg. 4, 154). Furthermore, Lukas reminds his audience in his essay "His Failures. His Critics" that Churchill had accumulated errors and mistakes that Churchill critics and detractors were attributing to his flawed character (pg. 129). For example, Churchill's futile fight against granting Dominion status to India from 1929 to 1935 was perhaps compatible with his imperialist credentials but certainly a clear blemish on his record. As a very experienced politician and knowledgeable historian at that time, Churchill should have known much better (pg. 14-15, 24, 135-136). Therefore, Lukas' collection of essays should not be construed as a shameful hagiography.

   Furthermore, Lukas reminds his audience in "Churchill's historianship" and "Churchill the visionary" that Churchill was generally cognizant of the lessons that he could draw from past events to articulate his often-visionary policies while reflecting on and shaping history on his turn (pg. 1-18, 47). Churchill was not only a spectator, but also a key actor and play writer of human comedy (pg. 102).

   Lukas also explores the ups and downs that Churchill had in his relationships with other history shapers such as Charles De Gaulle, Dwight Eisenhower, Adolf Hitler, Franklin Roosevelt and Joseph Stalin (pg. 19-20). Lukas convincingly explains that Churchill was facing an unpalatable choice between a Europe entirely ruled by Nazi Germany or half of Europe dominated by the Communists in case of allied victory (pg. 11, 27-28, 35). Churchill rightly first gave top priority to successfully fighting Hitler to death before trying in vain to stop Stalin in 1944-1945. Unlike some unimaginative people, Churchill understood right at the birth of the Soviet Union that the Bolsheviks should be stopped immediately before they grew into a gathering threat to the world. War-weary, the victors of WWI, unfortunately, gave only half-hearty support to the White Russians in their desperate fight against the Soviets (pg. 23). Once again, long-term pains were the reward for short-term gains.

   Some (American) readers will not be very pleased while reading Lukas' unflattering portrait of Eisenhower and the men around him in "Churchill and Eisenhower." As mentioned above, Churchill was definitely right to try to thwart in 1944-1945 the apparently irresistible advance of the Soviets in Central and Eastern Europe. Churchill clearly understood that geography and territory mattered, not ideology (pg. 42). For that reason, the British army met the Russians east of the entry to the Danish peninsula at the request of Churchill in 1945 (pg. 45). Unfortunately, the American leadership did not want to hear anything about it at that time (pg. 35-40, 46). Some European regions such as former East Germany and the Czech Republic should have been eventually spared the murderous and inefficient rule of the former Soviet Union (pg. 43). The Greeks should continue to be very thankful to Churchill for saving them from a communist tyranny (pg. 41, 48).

   In his famous, visionary Iron Curtain speech in 1946, Churchill expressed his concern with the murderous, inefficient embrace of Communism in the European regions under Stalin's control. American reception of this historic speech was at best lukewarm (pg. 47). Churchill knew better and was predicting at the end of 1952 that time was not on the side of Communism (pg. 48, 79).

   After the death of Stalin in 1953, Churchill, Prime Minister again, could not convince his friend Eisenhower, who in the meantime became President of the U.S.A., of finding some kind of accommodation with the new Soviet leadership (pg. 70, 73-74). Subsequent events proved that Eisenhower was right when he saw no difference after Stalin was gone (pg. 71, 77). Contrary to what Lukas thinks, Eisenhower should not be described as a leader without any vision under the nefarious influence of men such as John Foster Dulles (pg. 79-80). Many western leaders shared Eisenhower's views on this subject (pg. 81-82). The former Soviet Union was not yet in sufficient decline in the early 1950s to negotiate in a position of force with it as world leaders such as President Ronald Reagan and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher understood very well in the 1980s.




2. This was my first book by Lukacs and I am not a historical scholar. I picked it up to learn more about Churchill, and where this admirable leader was coming from. If you are looking for a primer or a thorough biography of W.S., this is not the book for you. However, if you are already familiar with his background, ancestry, and accomplishments in detail, this book serves as a kind of postmortem love letter.
   
   It is certainly well-written--Lukacs is a talented writer who knows how to turn a phrase, as he exhibits in his diary entries describing Churchill's funeral. However, for all of W.S.'s greatness, Lukacs seems a doggedly loyal to the man and utterly resistant to any criticism. There is also noticeable resentment toward Roosevelt, Eisenhower, and other American officials, as the author apotheosizes Churchill above any and all other leaders during the most critical time in 20th century history. Regardless of the veracity of his position, I would recommend reading up on other perspectives to temper Lukacs' ode to Churchill's infallibility.
   
   Overall, this is a brief and awe-inspiring read: a worthy eulogy for a worthy man that sometimes sparkles in prose, sometimes fizzles in excessive reverence.



3. What we have is a series of essays written about Churchill by a man who is both a highly regarded historian and a fan.
   
   The last essay, I found quite moving where he discusses his time at Churchill funeral.
   
   Yet the quality of these essays is not brilliant. In some ways they are repetitive with the same facts repeated again in another essay. Also the writer is also prone to exaggeration eg that the Germans could in June or July 1940 successfully invaded Britain.
   
   I have read much on Churchill and found this book disappointing maybe as from a historian of the quality of John Lukacs, I expected more.



4. I read this book here in Brazil, last year.It's cheap, concise and easy to understand.There's failures in this book?Yes.
   At first, this book is biased.John Lukacs is a Churchill's fan.
   To exemple, Mr. Churchill was a deeply eugenist.This book never talks about this.Another exemple is that in 1899, Winston Churchill spoke against Islam something like this:"How dreadfull are the curses which mohammedanism slays on its votaries...No stronger retrograde force exists in the world..."
   The core of this book is to show Churchill after 1930.Even this, it fails sometimes.In chapter 4, Lukacs claims that Eisenhower was wrong about than USSR, and Churchill was right.In fact both were right.The american politics for Cold War, was basically the same, for every american president, since Truman,in 1945, to George Bush in 1991.
   Churchill also was among the men who created Iraq.Churchill also put the last Iran's Xah in power.All of these Churchill's mistakes aren't in this book.
   This is a fan's book, not an unbiased book.



5. This is another of the "short" Churchill books that have become popular over the last several years and are less than full blown biographies but more than just private musings of the author. This author has an engaging style and if you've read any of his previous books on this subject it should come as no surprise that this book is for the most part a positive portrayal. The book covers the several themes stated in the title with a varying degree, (in this reader's opinion), of success. The high points include insight into Churchill's role, (and motivation), as an historian, his role with Stalin and the division of post WWII Europe and the evolution of Churchill's relationship with Eisenhower, (maybe the best chapter in the book). Considering all that has been written on Churchill this reader found some "new" perspectives and food for thought in the above. On the downside, several of the other chapters - the rehashing of Gallipoli, Churchill's "wilderness" years do not provide much detail or insight and the last chapter - a journal entry written contemporaneously describing Churchill's funeral - was little more than filler to this reader. This disparity in the writing is unfortunately one of the salient points I took away from the book. That being said, (written), this book would not be the place to start with Churchill but it is a more than an adequate supplement.

5 comments about Up from Slavery: An Autobiography.

1. Booker T. Washington never blames slavery for his problems. Instead he looks forward to the future, and works hard to create a school that helps
   black people.
   He has a positive attitude which attracts the help he needs to build his school. We can all learn from Booker T. Washington.
   Very inspiring.
   I loved this book.



2. Washington was born into slavery as a result of his mother having been raped by her master. This autobiography is a recounting of his struggle from slavery to freedom and on to getting an education and becoming a teacher and then an educational administrator as well as a "Black politician."
   
   In American culture, this narrative is cast as the quintessential "raise yourself by your boot strap" kind of story. In fact when I was in the First Grade, I can remember my First grade teacher, Mrs. Pogue, singing the praises of "the Great Booker T. Washington."
   
   And while there is a great deal to admire about Mr. Washington, there is also a side that only came to light after hearing the other side of his story. Washington was called an "accommodationist," "or "the great compromiser," which in the context of the times were euphemisms for being an "Uncle Tom," or the HNIC. He was good at maneuvering his way around in a racist white culture thinking that he was doing his people a great deal of good when in fact he was being taken advantage of, or when he was in fact consciously "selling his people out." By making a "virtue, out of personal necessity," Washington always had a good justification for his action and eventually became the prototype of this kind of black politician. Many Black preachers still use the Washington template for handling cross-racial situations. Plus how else were blacks to negotiate the difficult racist political terrain of those difficult times?
   
   In the book, for instance, he eschews and discourages blacks from seeking a liberal arts education and from attending college, as being frivolous. He argued for the more practical area of the "manual arts," and "the trades." While this may have been useful -- even good advice -- in the context of the times, there were others of his contemporaries, such as WEB Dubois, who saw Washington's approach as strictly a formulaic kind of Uncle Tomism. And the embarrassing treatment of him at the 1905 World's Fair, kind of sealed this image of him as a Black Uncle Tom by blacks and a "stooge" by whites.
   
   While the book is a good read, in retrospect, it shows Washington to have been very naïve politically, and too trusting of "the white man," who it seems never quite saw the world as he did and neither had Washington's, nor the black race's best interests in mind. Maybe it is a bit harsh to judge his action after the fact, but all other black leaders are judged by the same criteria and they come out unblemished, while Washington's accommodationist methods do not seem to have held up well over time nor have they bore any fruit.
   
   Three Stars



3. Up from Slavery, autobiography by Booker T. Washington, is a true classic in African-American literature. Washington opens Chapter 1: "A Slave Among Slaves" with his vivid recollections as a Negro child growing up in the South: a slave on a plantation in Virginia, a white father he never knew, illiterate and living in horrid conditions. After the emancipation of slaves, Washington's family moves to West Virginia where he labors at the salt furnace and in the coal mines. In his precious few moments of spare time, he learns to read and gains enough confidence to leave everything behind to journey to the Hampton Institute. Later, because of his success at Hampton, he is given the opportunity to start Tuskegee Institute in Alabama. Tuskegee Institute is successful partly due to Washington's extensive travel to the North to solicit funds for the school. The students at Tuskegee, in addition to the day-to-day traditional class work, are expected to learn an industrious trade and to work at mastering that trade. Based on his own life experience, Washington believes that the most prudent way the Negro race will persevere is through this combination of education, hard work and service to others. He believes that the White race will come to appreciate the Negro race only if the Negro people prove their worth to society. Because of his passive stance, many, such as W.E.B. DuBois, et. al., labeled Washington as "The Great Accomodator." In other words, accommodating those who were the enslavers instead of advocating for the rights of those who were enslaved. You can get a sense of this in Washington's most notable speech, the address to the Atlanta Cotton States and International Exposition of 1895:
   
   "The wisest among my race understand that the agitation of questions of social equality is the extremist folly, and that progress in the enjoyment of all the privileges that will come to us must be the result of severe and constant struggle rather than artificial forcing."
   
   This speech brought national acclaim to Booker T. Washington and, at the time, placed him in the forefront as one of the leading authorities of his race.



4. Washington's relentlessly positive message is encouraging but at the same time too perfect for believability. The reader desires that Washington would once take off the mask of cheer that he appears to be putting over some parts of his autobiography and tell us what he really thinks.
   
   His optimism extended to the political status of African-Americans and their future integration into American society. As the constant threat of lynching and KKK-ism continued throughout most of the 20th Century, even as positive steps were made in racial integration, it appears his optimism was at best proven wrong, or at least premature. And it is easy to understand the criticism by other contemporary black leaders like W. E. B. DuBois for his easy optimism.
   
   But on the other hand, until and unless I read otherwise in a well-researched biography, perhaps Washington's optimism isn't a front or a mask to cover deep bitterness, but is true and sincere, and indeed, nothing in his story hear reads as if forced or fraudulent.
   
   I purchased this book at the small National Park bookstore at Booker T. Washington's birthplace in rural southwestern Virginia. The setting still matches the quiet and isolation that Washington describes, and lends credence to his tale of self-reliant optimism. I also purchased a National Park Service pamphlet Booker T. Washington: An Appreciation Of The Man And His Times, which makes a nice short companion to Washington's masterpiece.



5. Wow! What an amazing story! It is fascinating to read Booker T. Washington's account of a childhood in slavery followed by his rise to national prominence as the founder of the Tuskegee Institute.
   
   While some may argue that Washington was naive and overly accomodating, I was amazed at his ability to forgive and see the best in people. He did not nurse grudges or let others bring him down. Whether or not you feel that he should have spoken up more for judicial equality, you have to admit that he was a strong, dedicated man of character.
   
   Everyone: white, black, brown, or any other shade, can benefit from reading the autobiography of this great American.

No comments about Louisiana Governors: Rulers, Rascals, and Reformers.

2 comments about Rosa Luxemburg Speaks.

1. This collection is worth it for the article "What is economics" alone. You'll never feel the need to plough through another tedious economics tome again. She applies her razor-sharp wit to ripping apart conventional economists' dronings. Explaining how early 19th century economists really tried to elucidate the workings of the system, she lays out how, once they'd realized that they were exposing a class system of exploitation that had no future, the whole lot just dissolved into obscurantist ramblings in order to befuddle the rest of us. Her exposé certainly makes Greenspan and his ilk look like either benighted fools or not-very-sophisticated snake oil peddlers. I loved it. No wonder I flunked Economics 101 - it didn't seem to make any sense because it doesn't. You'll never feel like a fool reading the Business section again.



2. Rosa Luxemburg was a revolutionary born in a Poland, which had been divided up amongst Germany, Austria, and Russia. This historical accident enabled her to be a participant in the working class movement in Poland, Russia, and Germany. She was a member of Germany's massive Social Democratic Party for the bulk of her life. This collection includes writings on subjects ranging from the German socialist leadership's betrayal of its working class following, capitalism and war, why workers can and should understand economics, and the new road to social justice opened by the Russian revolution.
   
   It is no wonder that the German ruling class, anxious to hold the line against the rising tide of workers and farmers revolution, murdered this fighter in 1919.

5 comments about Leap of Faith: Memoirs of an Unexpected Life.

1. I must admit; I didn't get very far, but this book is a self serving pack of lies by an apologist for the intransigence of the Arab world. For example, she refers to the "forced migration" of 1948 without ever mentioning that the ones doing the forcing were Arabs who promised their people that if they would get out they would "push the Jews into the sea". Nor does she mention the origin of the name "Palestinian" (hint: it is a Hebrew name).
   
   The saddest thing about the Arab world is that 1000 years ago they had the most advanced civilization on earth, and entirely due to problems of their own making they now preside over one giant hell hole.
   
   But if she came out and admitted this the Hashemite family would be in danger of losing their position of privilege in Transjordan.
   
   I would recommend that anyone who reads this book should also read "Warrior" by Ariel Sharon. At least he knows the history of Israel, Syria, and Egypt.



2. Here is a glimpse into Middle East history from someone who was there! My own family members have enjoyed reading it as much as I have; I think shall too!



3. Leap of Faith is interesting from the young all American becomes Queen standpoint. It really is amazing that a fairly regular young American woman gains the attention of the King of Jordan and becomes Queen.
   
   It is too bad she was not willing to be more real in her telling of a great story.
   
   The book ends up preaching about Queen Noor's view of the political world and quickly becomes tiresome and boring.
   
   It could have been a very exciting story given her exciting life but she had to go preach to us instead.



4. Unfortunately the autobiography is boring and somewhat distant and impersonal. Actually, overall the writing is uninspired and quite frankly, flat. Queen Noor, obviously a beautiful, intelligent, well-educated woman uses the book as a platform for spouting some pretty blatant untruths about the modern history of the Middle East. I guess I should have expected that, but it was disappointing nonetheless. I might have gritted my teeth and gotten past her politics if the love story was interesting. But it wasn't simply because the writing was so unemotional and disconnected. As I read the book, it was as if I could hear someone speaking in a monotone voice and it was almost sleep-inducing.



5. This biography is not great literature. It's centered in the most complex and violent regions of our times but rarely scratches the surface. Noor's diplomacy in describing people and events - always the high road, even in the midst of deceit and betrayal - is maddeningly constant and obscures rather than reveals. So what's to like about the book? It's an extraordinary story of a young western woman who embraces the east: it's people, culture, religion and thought. It's the story of her love for King Hussein, who in a world of the powerful, is largeless powerless but for his integrity in the struggle for peace. Her perspective, is that of the Palestinian Arab. Their voice needs to be heard. This book is a thoughtful start.

5 comments about God and Hillary Clinton: A Spiritual Life.

1. What is next? Paris Hilton book will be out on how she "really really" read the bible in jail?



2. Let's state this clearly from the beginning. Whether you embrace Hillary Clinton's politics or not, whether you embrace Hillary Clinton's beliefs or not, her beliefs are a critically important issue, for they deeply impact her political convictions.
   
   Here's another fact to clarify. The author, Paul Kengor, is not an apologist for Hillary Clinton. He has written similar books on Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. His aim in all three books is to write an accurate spiritual history of these three important political figures.
   
   In "God and Hillary Clinton," Kengor excels at revealing to readers the spiritual shaping factors that brought Hillary Clinton to embrace the beliefs and practices she does. If you want insight into who she is, what she believes, who influenced her personally, who she read, and why, then this is the book to read. What's more, Kengor's writing style, his first-hand interviews, and his access to letters and other documents, make this a well-written, creative, captivating history book--no easy task.
   
   Reviewer: Bob Kellemen, Ph.D., is the author of Beyond the Suffering: Embracing the Legacy of African American Soul Care and Spiritual Direction, Spiritual Friends, and Soul Physicians.



3. Paul Kengor's "God and Hillary Clinton: A Spiritual Life" is a fascinating look at the life of the former First Lady from the perspective of her religious beliefs and how these have changed from her childhood, through college and law school, her marriage to Bill Clinton, her time in Arkansas, Bill's presidency, Bill's indiscretions, her senate career, and to the present.
   
   Dr. Kengor is charitable in his assessment that Hillary has kept her Christian faith through all of these chapters in her life. One could easily surmise, however, that Hillary has long since traded her Christianity for a secular, Marxist, utopian "golden calf" to which she attaches a flimsy "Christian" label whenever it is politically expedient.
   
   In many ways, Hillary has been a victim of her circumstances. She was victimized by her youth minister, Don Jones, who began her indoctrination into Marxist Christianity. She was victimized by her parents' inattentiveness by failing to monitor what Jones was teaching her, and who later allowed her to attend left-wing havens like Wellesley and Yale, which completed her indoctrination. She was victimized by the rise of the counter-culture during her period of intellectual development which kept her from realizing the value of Western civilization and the intellectual vapidity of its detractors. But despite this, she is still ultimately responsible for becoming the secular, power-hungry, political opportunist that she is today.
   
   A spiritual biography is an interesting approach on the life of arguably the most prominent politician in the last two decades. Kengor's book paints a tragic life (though I'm sure Hillary herself is completely unaware what a tragedy it is.) It's not the tragedy of the hurts suffered on account of her husband and her critics. The real tragedy is the loss of her soul by the seduction of power.



4. I am not especially taken by Clinton politics and their skewed code of ethics, though I am not at odds with some of their policies. Therefore, I have no deep axe to grind, no axe which would hinder an honest and objective review.
   
   However, I must say, I simply do not believe these other reviewers to be impartial. They're probably either Clinton hacks, or from the publisher. These reviews are just glowing with adoration.
   
   First, I gave this book three stars on the merit of history. Her formative years, particularlly, which is insightful. Do not expect any objectivity from Paul Kengor, however - this is what he does for a living! He writes fluff-pieces for high political figures. This is just a book to let people know that Hillary has "real" faith.
   
   But where has Hillary's faith guided her ethically? Apparently this faith is not enough to quell her "crush-all" ambition, nor her Evida-like, self-structured persona. I am still left pondering the lives that were put into foreclosure and turmoil during the travel staff firings. I am left contemplating her lie under oath, which was ruled so, in the final investigation in 2000. How can you lie about not knowing about these firings? It is a very sad thing to constantly insult the intellect of voters. But she has, continuously. Some faith.
   
   We know about her "faith" soley from the image she has spent a life time creating. And, you know, I am not terribly mad about that. All politicians do it. Just wish it weren't so obvious.
   
   This book offers us some insight on her childhood faith, just don't take it at face value. Hillary isn't the same person she was 40 years ago.



5. Kengor's books on God are very good, but this is the first person whose Christian view does not harmonize with her political actions. The most glaring is her support of partial birth abortion. She is prepared to kill my child at full term, murder and dismember him. Does she feel that 8,5 months after the Annuciation, Our Lady could have said "I have changed my mind"? Her view is clearly hostile to all biblical teaching and amounts to what Reagan calls "the second oldest religion=you will be God's." Is she God, or is God, God?

5 comments about Mayor Corning: Albany Icon, Albany Enigma.

1. I enjoyed this book very much. There were many facets of the Mayors life, that as a long time resident of the city had been unknown to me. The descriptions of Groton and Yale, as well as his experiences in Maine and the Adirondacks were of great interest. I thought that his overwhelming negative effect on the city and his personal shortcomings were well described and documented. The major flaw of the book was the lack of material on the reformers, other than Republicans, who for many years led the fight for progressive government in Albany.



2. Grondahl captures the man, his personal world and his public world, notably Albany New York. The book will be good reading for anyone but especially fascinating to people interested in politics. Corning was a great character. A patrician who had the common touch and whose office was readily available to anyone, and immensely charming. Many otherwise savvy people--like Governor Cuomo--- have glossed over the tight and largely negative effect of his 42 years as mayor of Albany to cite him as a public servant exemplar.

   Grondahl's biography of Corning compares to the great biographies of Robert Caro--about Robert Moses and Lyndon Johnson. Authoritative, full of passion, insightful, and great story well told. Highly recommended!




3. I liked the photographs the most. They were the first things I looked for in the book. My dad put my name in it too!



4. As one familiar with the author's newspaper work, it came as no surprise that his book would be such a compelling read. I look forward to his next effort.



5. This is a fascinating political biography of the man who served as mayor of Albany for over 40 years.' as such he was the longest serving mayor of any major American city.
   Mr. Grondahl offers his readers a lengthy over 500 page study of Mr. Corning. The volume is accompanied by a fine bibliography and end notes.
   Corning was an unsual big city politico, a true American aristocrat a descendant of an old American railroad and banking family, who graduated Groton and Yale, who chose to allign himself with the old line working class Democratic Irish political machine in Albany which under the leadership of Dan McConnel which dominated Albany for most of the 20th century.
   This book explores Cornings life and career. We have chapters dedicated to his patrimony, his years at Groton and Yale, his time in the US Army, his lifeas a summer resident in Maine.
   We also learn much about his private life his marriage , his 2 children and his second family the Noonan's wife husband and children.After I finished reading this monograph I felt I knew Corning very very well.
   While the author certainly does deal with Corning's service as mayor and his potiical life, there are many notable omissions in this otherwise fine study.
   We learn very little about the changing landscape of the Albany political scene. Like all cities Albany gained a large Black population in the 1950's . What was the relatioship between Corning and his handlers to this group. This is dealt with in several paragraphs, wheras Corning the sportsman and fisherman gets at least a whole chapter.In general the new dynamics between the Wasp class, the old immigrant groups and the new minority groups are hardly discussed,
   After reading the book I have to presume that labor unions did not exist in Albany as they are hardly mentioned, except for a critical effort by the local firemen to unionize and labor problems in the building of South Mall. But were Albany's civil servants unionized? how about teachers and other such groups?
   Yer the author does not really study this aspect.
   Mr. Grondahl makes short shrift of the white flight from Albany and its effect on Albany's government and democratic machine. We know more about Mrs. Corning's gardening philosophy than about the changing political landscape of Albany.
   That is not to say that this volume is not very good political reading. the chappter about Corning's rivalry with his old "buddy" Nelson Rockefeller in their days at Albany is excellent and makes for interesting study in how politicians evade responsibility and seek credit.Corning's daily city hall routine, his ability to reply to all of Albany's citizens and the like is also a fascinating account of the makings of political power.
   This book is a major contribution in the study of political machines in the 2oth century American political culture.. It joins similiar studies of Mayors Richard Daley, Richard Lee of New Haven, James Curley of Boston as important reading in the understanding of the 20th century American urban political scene. I would have hoped that the author would choose to compare Corning's machine to lets say James Curley in Boston. I highly recommend it for any student of urban American politics.

No comments about Panegyric, Volumes 1 and 2.

2 comments about The Rush Limbaugh Story: Talent on Loan from God an Unauthorized Biography.

1. If you like Limbaugh or hate him, this is a "must have" book. Get the straight story on Rush's draft deferement, the debt he owes to Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Disk Jockey Larry Lujack. Colford is a serious journalist and does a fine job of shucking this particular ear of American corn.



2. This plodding narrative of Rush's life story highlights some intereting facts (such as that he never voted in the Reagan years) and talks with significant people (Rush's first wife). But it's carefully written so as not to offend the talk show host. Since the author had access to Rush's mom and brother, he skews the information in Rush's favor and is too careful in presenting a story that could have been much more interesting.
   
   For being written by a "journalist," this book has a number of errors about radio and the book seems padded (with chapters devoted to comparing Rush to Arthur Godfrey??)
   
   The book also has no footnotes, no information sources listed and no photos. So it's incomplete.
   
   The facts are that Rush was fired from his first four radio jobs, had a couple of fast early marriages, dropped out of college after a year (and failed classes while he attended)--yet there isn't much "dirt" in this book. Even his first wife hasn't much negative to say--is everyone fearful of what Rush would say on the air or somehow get back at them legally?
   
   So if you want the basic facts they are here--but they are presented in such a way as to not offend the host.

1 comments about The Life & Times of William Howard Taft, Vol. 2.

1. I have read nearly every book in print about WHT. Pringle's effort is quintessential. Pringle begins his treatment by admitting that his interest in Taft is superficial: He decided to write these books only after completing works on Teddy Roosevelt. Taft is usually treated as a moon to Roosevelt's planet. Pringle typifies this treatment. One gets the impression that Pringle is a lifeguard forced to rescue a man whom he loathes. In the end, the entire effort devolves into an apologia. The lifeguard, after struggling against the currents of his own indifference, pulls his lifeless charge to shore, explaining to a hostile crowd: "Every man, even this loathsome creature, deserves a chance." He then walks away while Taft turns blue. I give this book three stars because it is better than nothing, but just barely.