4 comments about The Leaders We Deserved (and a Few We Didn't): Rethinking the Presidential Rating Game.

1. Dr. Felzenberg creates a new and useful methodology for rating U.S. Presidents. Instead of one single grade as in previous surveys, he rates presidents on six criteria. The first three are internal characteristics that each president carries into the Oval Office: character, competence, and vision. The second three reflect presidential accomplishments: economics, protection of liberty and human rights, and defense and international affairs.
   
   Felzenberg uses his methodology masterfully to provide his readers with concise, intriguing, and often amusing portraits of all Presidents (except William H. Harrison, James A. Garfield, and George W. Bush). Felzenberg weaves recent economic and historical research into his vignettes to provide readers with new and sometimes surprising insights into many Presidents.
   
   For example, Felzenberg demonstrates that Ulysses S. Grant deserves a far higher rating, especially for his protection of the rights of the freedmen, than most historians have granted him. At the same time, Felzenberg convincingly proves that although Andrew Jackson was an extremely competent in achieving his policy objectives, his economic policies and his disregard for human rights were very damaging to the United States.
   
   Felzenberg brilliantly peers into the complex personalities of Lincoln, Wilson, both Roosevelts, Nixon, and Reagan. Unlike many other historians, Felzenberg's analyses of the economic policies and results of the Presidents are well grounded in sound economic reasoning and indisputable facts.
   
   This is a hard book to put down. Every reader will learn a great deal about the men who have served in the White House. Some readers may disagree with some of Felzenberg's grades for certain Presidents in one of the six criteria or another. However, all of Felzenberg's judgments are objective and based on thorough research. In summary, this thought-provoking book is a must buy and read.



2. Comparing presidents from over two centuries may seem to require a ton of homework at best, if it's not an impossible task altogether. But this book succeeds because:
   1) The US Constitution hasn't changed much, nor the American's desire for liberty and the pursuit of happiness;
   2) Felzenberg has done his homework, is insightful and is a master of concision;
   3) As primary reasons for success/failure of aspects of a presidency become apparent, the book's conclusion provides a natural, clear and coherent how-to-look-for-a-good-president guide. And heaven knows, all this matters.
   Like all the best history, this excellent book leaves me wanting to read more.



3. The idea behind Felzenberg's book is indeed a new approach, and one that works well. But he limits himself to only a few presidents for each of his 6 categories of measuring a president. Now surely some presidents are more important than others, and if he covered every president 6 times we would have a 1000 page book. But sometimes this approach leaves some questions open--for example, he gives Ulysses S. Grant a 5 on "Vision" then doesn't talk about Grant's vision at all. Another (minor) criticism I would have is the "Preserving and Extending Liberty" section almost exclusively deals with race, which while obviously a key factor is too narrow a definition.
   
   Overall if you are a presidents buff and have always been interested in the ratings game as he calls it, I recommend the book. I'll make a final note: if you want to read about Lincoln and Reagan, he definitely focuses on those 2 guys more than the other 40.



4. The reason for one star is that it gives you the impression this is a fresh, unbiased look at the Presidency. It isn't. You KNOW it's bad when he gives Reagan higher marks for economics and human rights than Clinton. I can think of a host of reasons why Reagan doesn't deserve the scores the author smugly gives him. If you're a conservative or a big Reagan fan, this book just validates your own opinions, so you won't really see anything new. If you're looking for a more objective, balanced evaluation of past Presidents, this book is definitely NOT it.

5 comments about The Real McCain: Why Conservatives Don't Trust Him and Why Independents Shouldn't.

1. The author Cliff Scheter was a guest on Cashin In on Saturday 6-14-08. He came across as a complete idiot whose ideas where just so ridiculous
   that you wonder how this man ever graduated from any college.



2. A bit long winded in some areas but makes its point well. It openned my eyes on several issues.



3. uses, gets by on the free pass issued him due to a collective guilt associated with the Viet Nam War. It's a masterful piece of fraud coming from a man who graduated from the lowest 5 percentile of his class and who wants us to believe he's the best qualified to solve social security, the economy, make sense of an illegitimate war, serve as a world leader. Stacked up, his deficits are, should be, far too numerous for him to be a serious contender. The GOP made a huge mistake in offering him up.



4. Any interested in current affairs and politics will find THE REAL MCCAIN: WHY CONSERVATIONISTS DON'T TRUST HIM - AND WHY INDEPENDENTS SHOULDN'T makes for a hard-hitting, critical analysis of the gap between McCain's public record and his media image. Numerous sources blend with the author's sometimes humorous observations to make for an involving survey of McCain's history of flips on major public issues and policy.
   
   Diane C. Donovan
   California Bookwatch



5. I am privileged to number among my friends, acquaintances, and relatives several people who are fairly high up in politics, government, and the military who have dealt with Senator McCain in one capacity or another in their lines of work. They represent points of view ranging from conservative to moderate to liberal to staunchly apolitical. They've all told me privately that the image of John McCain as a principled, consistent, reforming maverick is a myth based on very little truth - and that he's got a wicked temper and an "it's personal" approach to politics, too. Cliff Schecter's THE REAL MCCAIN is one of several recent books which (finally) are starting to deconstruct the McCain myth. From immigration to Iraq to taxes to the Religious Right - and even his signature issue, campaign finance reform - Schecter documents McCain's always-shifting, often unclear positions and inconsistent votes. He also notes how McCain deftly uses his (admittedly genuine) war hero status to get a free pass from the media, the public, and other politicians. All in all, Schecter portrays McCain as a skillful opportunist who holds very few genuine principles of any kind.
   
   Unfortunately, Schecter's personal biases (leftwing/partisan Democrat) intrude upon what could have been a more objective narrative and tone; such a balanced style would have lent his revelations much greater authority and credibility among the independents, conservatives, and moderates of both parties who may be considering whether or not to vote for McCain. Instead, Schecter gratuitously fires off cheap shots at McCain and other Republicans, and also tries to pass off several extremely biased sources as objective and nonpartisan. Sometimes he criticizes McCain just for not being liberal enough, without any effort to relate this to what I thought was the focus of the book: the man's character. These types of things aren't necessary to make Schecter's point, and in fact end up detracting from it.
   
   The nasty, partisan style of this book - reminiscent of a leftwing Anne Coulter -- is not surprising when you look at who exactly Schecter and his publisher are. Cliff Schecter is a hardcore liberal, with a resume that includes NPR, Air America, the Huffington Post, and organizations affiliated with the AFL-CIO, among other things, so he's hardly an unbiased, nonpartisan source. And Polipointpress, the publisher, also prints such objective, nonpartisan books as: WHY I'M A DEMOCRAT; JACKED: HOW CONSERVATIVES ARE PICKING YOUR POCKET; and HOUSE OF ILL REPUTE: REFLECTIONS ON WAR, LIES, AND AMERICA'S RAVAGED REPUTATION, among many others.
   
   That doesn't necessarily mean the things written here about McCain are necessarily false, any more than the ideological bent of Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity means that the things they say about the Clintons or Barack Obama are always false, either. But it does mean that moderates, independents, and even many principled conservatives who have genuine reasons to dislike McCain will be turned off by the way Mr. Schecter presents his case here. I've never remotely been a McCain fan, and even I was bothered by it.

2 comments about Dinner with Mugabe: The Man Behind the Monster.

1. "Dinner with Mugabe: The untold story of a freedom fighter who became a tyrant", is a wonderful read that describes acurately why Mugabe is so angry and pushed into his current situation. My complaint is the subtitle of the book that Amazon advertises, " the man behind the monster". The real subtitle is on the front of the book. This other thing is a heading for an inside flap note. The average American has no idea about how England and the United States have colluded to destabalize The Zimbabwe nation state primarily because of Land Reform differences. Heidi Holland is trying to teach us how Mugabe got to this point in time, and Amazon's mangling of the subtitle of her book does not help people approach this book in a positive way. Please use the real subtitle which is plainly written on the front of the dust jacket.
   Marion W. Sykes



2. Although Heidi Holland met Mugabe only a couple of times, she still provides some good interviews and insights into Mugabe. He has unfortunately proved to be one of the worst leaders of the past couple of decades. Look at the results of his presidency--100,000% inflation, massive food shortages and an 80% unemployment rate. Zimbabwe is an embarrassment to Africa and it didn't have to be that way. Here's a detailed critique of what went wrong, where it went wrong and who is responsible. Mugabe is an intriguing figure because he began his career largely heralded by everyone as a freedom fighter like Nelson Mandela. To see how tragically it turned out, leaves many questions; it's a void Holland is clearly trying to fill.
   
   Holland writes well--the words are fluid and vivid and so it's easy to see how her years of reporting for the BBC, the Guardian and many other reputable news organizations has helped. The book is broken into 15 chapters with an index and bibliography for further reading. I do have one complaint, that I wish this were written by someone who had spent more time with Mugabe instead of relying mostly on interviews and a couple of brief encounters with him.
   
   However, I am glad this book was written and even more glad that it was published in America! I heard Heidi interviewed on the BBC and was dismayed that the book was available for sale only in South Africa. (Note: The book was rushed into production here so the British grammar remains. IE: magnetised instead of magnetized.) Yes, we are interested in the subject here too and are horrified by the still unfolding tragedy of Zimbabwe. If only there was something more we could do to help, but what?

5 comments about White House Ghosts: Presidents and Their Speechwriters.

1. Even though I live in Australia, I have long been fascinated with U.S. politics. Especially since GWB walked into the job. It made your politics a lot more interesting. (Good or bad, make your own decisions, I have certainly made mine.)
   
   Even more interesting to me are the Presidents speechwriters. I realise there may be plenty of good books available on this topic which I could have bought, however I was always waiting for that up to date and new book which inevitably had to be released.
   
   For me, this is that book. I am sorry that I do not have the ability to write a comprehensive review. My writing skills do not allow, which is probably why I am fascinated with the skills of a Presidential Speechwriter.
   
   If, like me, you are a layperson who simply enjoys reading about these remarkable writers and how they interact with their Presidents, I am sure you will not be disappointed with this book.
   
   Also, Mr. Schlesinger writes in such a way that even though this book looks imposing, with almost 600 pages, it is nice to read and easily digestible.



2. It seemed to me to lend itself best to "dipping into," read a little ahead there, double back here, and check the index to see when an interesting character enters.
   
   But I would recommend it. Especially since the craft and art of speechwriting (and making) is such a crucial part of the modern American presidency.
   
   Two of my favorites, even though they were given by presidents whom I would not have supported (had I been old enough, or in one case alive) were Nixon's first inaugural and Reagan's "Tear down this wall."
   
   Here, you'll find out who wrote these and other of the best-remembered speeches in history.



3. 'White House Ghosts' seeks to answer the questions of who wrote the best Presidential speeches and lines, which President gave the speech, and who came up with the ideas at the core of those speeches. Often times, other than who said it, those questions are not easily answered but Schlesinger still weaves a great historical accounting of presidential history, communications, and policy development since FDR. At its best, Schlesinger makes clear that speechwriting is a collaborative effort that brings together a President's vision with the wordsmithing of a talented writer with the time to spend on a speech. At its worse, speechwriting appears to drive policy development and changes because a good line was created, so the policy must follow through. Perhaps even worse is when a line has no relation to policy at all (see President George W. Bush's second inaugural). Schlesinger's exhaustive research brings you into each presidency, shows you how the President interacted with the speechwriters and how some of the most famous, and important, words of the 20th and early 21st century came about. A must for any student or fan of presidential history.



4. as a speechwriter, this book was manna from heaven for me. there are few books around that look at modern presidential speechwriting in depth. it also has a broader appeal as a presidential history that gets you right inside the inner circle of modern presidents. the book is well written, excruciatingly researched and filled with funny, inspiring and humanizing anecdotes.



5. It was quick, easy, amusing read; lots of historical anecdotes from each White House since FDR....but apart from that, I can't say I know much more about what makes for a good speech, a good speechwriter, or a good Presidential speaker now than I did before I read the book.
   Apart from figuring out that speeches written by committee don't make for memorable prose, the anecdotes don't really add up to much--- not much insight as to what FDR, JFK, and RR shared in common, if anything, that made them great in this department, versus what Carter and the 2 Bushes shared, if anything, that made them so mediocre....
   Look for a fun read, but don't look for any analysis or depth of understanding...

5 comments about Covering: The Hidden Assault on Our Civil Rights.

1. Dean Yoshino has given us a lesson using the perfect mixture of poetry and prose in this his latest work. Reading it was like listening to a Aretha Franklin: refreshing! But most importantly, the work will act as a bridge between minority groups; limning aspects of experience that we all--- religious, sexual, and ethnic--- have in common. That is to say, it will help us to understand how the laws of the land apply to all who are pressured to conform to majority norms.



2. I recently heard Professor Yoshino speak here in Seattle on a day in celebration of Human Rights Day, and I can attest to his being a gifted speaker and possessing an extraordinary intellect.
   
   However, with respect to the notion of "covering," a term I believe that he has coined in this book to illuminate a polemical topic that he wishes to place squarely into the fore of the larger map/discourse of civil rights in the U.S., I am perplexed that his notion of the "mainstream" apparently does not take into account more dimensions, e.g., the cultural anthropological/sociological.
   
   From my own experience as a gay man AND as an Asian-American, I have found, largely to my dismay, that in either social group, there is, in fact, a "mainstream" that does, in fact, exert pressure to conform to its "majority" norms, behaviors...
   
   And I would suppose that in any "society," whether it be in a nation-state such as Japan, or a social group such as African-Americans, that there do exist "mainstream" cultures that individuals within those groups do have to "contend with."
   
   "Covering" as Yoshino has placed it has, by dint of his conceptual definition of it has overwhelmingly negative connotations, one which allows a "mainstream" body within a social group to exert pressures on individual members who do not conform, whether out of choice or due to individual disposition.
   
   But sometimes what could be considered "covering" (by some people) is also a means of what one could consider "healthy assimilation" or a reasonable concession to the majority--without being in any way a "sell-out."
   
   When and where such "concessions" become a sell-out, of course, is an open question. But even where "adaptation" in some behaviors to the "norm" of the mainstream does occur, it may simply entail "building bridges" and acknowledging the opinion of the majority rather than remaining in isolation from them.
   
   (If, for example, I am a nudist, I can still choose to walk outside of my house WITH clothing on, if only in simple deference to the fact that the law and the majority of my fellow citizens deem it an offense or offensive or both).
   
   This is not to deny the legitimacy of the claims of gay people to equal rights (to marriage, protection from discrimination in the job market, etc.) but to point out that "covering" might be understood in a more nuanced context. Covering, in all its different aspects, is not tantamount in all situations to being an "assault on civil rights."
   
   Covering may simply describe the "interface" where the majority and a smaller grouping, at least in a particular situation, and where the minority accedes to the norms of the former--despite the negative overtones that the author is ascribing to it. In other cases, the reverse (majority accedes to the behaviors of the minority despite a clear divergence of opinion) could and, in fact, DOES happen in America.
   
   In some instances, too, dysfunctional or inappropriate (vis-a-vis the majority) behavior by a minority is tolerated, condoned, or even lauded.
   
   Discussions of loaded discussions of "diversity" or "covering" need to be evaluated within a context rather than be seen in a predetermined, black-or-white intellectual "matrix."
   
   In other words, the major concern that I have with this book is that it too "obviously" has an agenda stamped on it.
   
   The personal details disclosed nicely balance the analytical (legal) side of the discussion.
   
   But in terms of overall appeal to both mind AND heart, a little less Paul Haggis (director/screenwriter of "Crash"). Taking a strong position on an issue, with corroborative evidence, is fine. Re-iterating that position--as a constant thread--throughout a long discussion may seem to some people evidence of "not dodging an issue." But considering all the different dimensions of that issue would provide, I believe, a more balanced, more cogent argument in favor of one's position.



3. The Publisher's Weekly review says it all, but I cannot let the opportunity pass to add my voice to those honoring this book. Yes, it's a simple concept, elaborated over 200 pages, but there is nothing monotonous about it. The academic monotony characteristic of similar monographs is thwarted through the simplest of means: the scholar-author is also a poet. He writes on the minutiae of civil rights law with the compression and unexpected image that make strong poetry memorable. I heard the author speak on the concept of Covering on the Maine Public Radio broadcast of the Chataqua Program. The discussion was interesting enough, but when he read the Epilogue, I immediately thought, "I have to have that in my Commonplace Book." As a politically active gay man and 15-year conductor of a gay men's chorus, I've often meditated on the meaning of cultural appropriation, assimilation, and accommodation and the resulting effect on actualization and abnegation of the individual. So, Kenji Yoshino's orderly discussion of coversion, passing, and covering is immediately attractive to me. But it is not my habit to read 'brainiac' books. I'm put off by the customary tone, talking down to me, especially when the subject of the discussion is, by inference, me and the people I know and love. This one is the exception. I feel like Yoshino and I have just spent a long evening, with a wide variety of friends, talking about something of immediate concern to all of us. And then there's that Epilogue. Talk is one thing, but how we live it out is usually quite another. And it's never simple. That's why it's best left to the hands of a poet, and this poet has done it well.



4. A mix of professional experience, glimpses of personal experience, poetic imagination and some interesting ideas for America's future. I am glad I've read it. The only regret is that the book doesn't lead to a powerful, clear vision for the country. The very interesting ideas from the introduction are just briefly repeated at the end. Maybe someone else will build upon this material? The book certainly encourages a discussion. Maybe that was the whole point?



5. No offense to Yoshino, but in truth, he doesn't make many actual points. This is a great book if you want to hear about his personal journey, but it's not very enlightening overall.

3 comments about Alpha Dogs: The Americans Who Turned Political Spin into a Global Business.

1. In the early 1980's, I remember walking into the Manhattan offices of Sawyer Miller on East 60th Street, and wondering what went on beyond its reception desk's wall of television monitors. Were they part Madison Avenue, part CIA and NSC? Who were these green beret alpha dogs who parachuted into campaigns to save the day? How did a Mayflower descendant/son of a shoe company exec (Sawyer) team up with the son of a shoe salesperson (Miller)? How did Miller, the man credited with "Coke is it," "Have a Coke and a Smile," and "Great Taste, Less Filling" end up selling candidates to American and international voters? Now I know. James Harding explains the history of modern political consulting, and gives detailed accounts of the growth of the self confident Sawyer Miller Group, its tactics, clients, successes, speeches, ads, and failures, and its growth around the world and effects on international elections. It is a fascinating read. At times their negative ads turned off voters, but engaged others; some were informative, others were created to "relate" to the voter, and sometimes their clients political and corporate clients lost, proving that ads are not always magic potions. As for going negative: the author tells us that even Thomas Jefferson went negative against George Washington in 1796, and Cicero, in 63 BCE, wrote about how it is delicious to go negative against your opponent when running for political office.
   
   The author writes on how Sawyer Miller's clients ranged from the Dali Lama and Vaclav Havel to Lech Walesa, Shimon Peres, Puerto Rico's Colon, Chile's Valdes, Ecuador's Borja, Bolivia's "Goni,"and Corey Aquino, and from Chris Dodd, Jane Byrne, and Scoop Jackson to Bruce Babbitt, as well as saintly domestic clients and international rogues known for alleged torture tactics. They worked for Amex, Drexel, BAT, Goldman, Resorts Intnl and more. The consultant who penned Newt Gingrich's Contract With America, also penned documents for Tony Blair, Boris Yeltsin, and Silvio Berlusconi. The author explains how politics became tactics instead of ideologies, and candidates were packaged like consumer products. In Harding's hands, we learn about the machinations of Black, Manafort ,Stone; Squier, Napolitan, Garth, Schwartz, Wirthlin, McCleary, Grunwald, Carville, Sawyer, Miller, and more.
   
   Chapter 1 tells the story of the birth and growth of consulting by framing it within an exciting fly on the wall account of consultant Ned Kennan's (aka Nadav Katznelson) meeting with Boston's multi term mayor, Kevin White. Kennan, who focused on the driver's of voter behavior, loved to give bad news to the powerful, which he did to White, who was 20 points behind in the latest polls. In Chapter 2, we watch as Sawyer learns the limits of consulting, polls, personalities when he heads to Venezuela and tries to turn a pussycat of a candidate into a tiger. Chapter 3 relates the story of New Coke, its political-like battle with Pepsi, and the lesson it has for understanding polling results. By far my most favorite chapters were Chapters 4 and 5, which tell the stories of American political consulting in Israel and the Philippines. The account of Mrs. Aquino, the downfall of Marcos, and the roles of Cardinal Sin, Reagan, the U.S. media, certain Senators, and "American" consultants were so enlightening and suspenseful that I read that chapter a second time.
   
   Briefly, to K.I.S.S. and Keep on Message, I recommend this as a lively informative and necessary read in this Presidential election year.



2. With only a limited understanding of political campaigning, mostly garnered from an appreciation of Josh in the The West Wing, I thought this book was a well-intentioned but ultimately misguided gift from a friend which might, at its most useful, end up being re-gifted. But from the first few pages I found myself completely sucked into this authoritative and beautifully written account of Sawyer Miller, a political consultancy firm which sold the art of American politics to the rest of the world. A must read for anyone who wants to read between the lines of political spin - and about the people who wrote them. Outstanding.



3. Any regular watcher of Jon Stewart and 'The Daily Show' will recognize this author, who made a hilarious appearance there a few days ago to talk about this book. The surprise is: the book behind the author is actually quite good.
   
   It's about the political spinmeisters who brought behind-the-scenes image consulting into its modern form. James Harding bores in on one particular political consultancy, Sawyer Miller. It's an excellent choice. The opening story about Sawyer Miller's counseling of Kevin White, the Irish mayor of Boston, is equal parts funny and insightful. ("Voters don't like you!" the consultant tells the candidate, while devising a strategy that helps him win anyway.) The consultants go around the world -- helping Cory Aquino oust Marcos in the Philippines, another riveting story -- and in and out of countless elections and boardrooms to find ways for candidates to get out the right message. It is not always pretty, what goes on out of view of the camera. From bare-knuckled fighting to seat-of-the-pants improvising, the tactics of a campaign invariably tell a memorable tale.
   
   Harding is a knowing, graceful guide. He has a sensible grasp of politics and the unpredictable dynamics that rule virtually every campaign. His writing weaves subtle observation and sharp insight into the narrative with seeming effortlessness. He always offers just the right amount of historical background to any episode. He never gets bogged down in more policy than you want. Yet I really appreciated his smart, illuminating explanation of the politics in any situation his protagonists wandered into, and they did wander far and wide.
   
   A highly enjoyable book.

5 comments about The Autobiography of Malcolm X : As Told to Alex Haley.

1. Even though i didnt enjoy being referred to as a white blue eyed devil every other paragraph. This book made me think and challenged me to treat my fellow man better. After reading about malcolms childhood and how he grew up i can now understand his bitterness and why he fought so hard for equality. I now see why time magazine voted it one of the best books of the century.



2. Every American should read this literature. It discusses America's most obvious flaw. More importantly it demonstrates the power of transformation, tolerance of self and of others, cooperation and the importance of hope.



3. An excellent unflinching book about Malcolm X read for my "Understanding Religious Traditions in Multicultural America" last spring. While at times unnerving to read due to its stark honesty, it was very illuminating. As a non-American, it really helped give me further insight into how powerful and tense race is of an issue in American culture. As someone born into a Muslim family, but is a closet agnostic, the perversions I felt Elijah Muhammad perpetuated made me severely uncomfortable anyway. Several parts of this book made me cry, or be wistful I could somehow have found peace in Islam as Malcolm X did.
   
   A very good book.



4. Despite the dispiriting revelation that this book was almost totally written by Alex Haley, "The Autobiography of Malcolm X" remains one of my favorite books. Which is a little strange, since his well-known struggles with civil rights, the police, Black identity, and Islam have little or no relevance to my life. Sorry.
   
   The part of this book that affects me most deeply is where Malcolm is in prison educating himself, studying on the floor of his cell in the dim night light. I can't think of another tale about the birth of an autodidact and the rewards of reading that is as uplifting and memorable as Malcolm's. I first read this book about twenty years ago, and that's the part that always sticks with me: the power of books to change your life, regardless of who you are or what you've done. And much of the rest sticks with me too, for example the poignant case of "West Indian Archie."
   
   I would like to advise, however, that you buy this edition: Autobiography of Malcolm X (Penguin Modern Classics), rather than the Ballantine edition, as the binding on the latter has proven unreliable, to say the least. I have gone through three different copies of the Ballantine edition of Malcolm X and the binding has fallen apart on all three of them -- to the point where the covers have come completely off, even though I don't really mistreat books. It can't just be bad luck.
   
   Malcolm X was said to have been a formidable debater, yet it's curious to me that none of his opponents ever made the obvious, unanswerable point: that whatever crimes and horrors the West can be charged with vis-à-vis the African slave trade, those of Islam have been even more extensive and blood-soaked. They go back a lot further, and continued a lot later. In fact, it was only two years previous to Malcolm's making his Hajj to Mecca (1964) that slavery was made illegal in Saudi Arabia!
   
   Hence jettisoning Christianity and Western culture for the supposed moral high ground of Islam was, when you think about it, a dingy move on Malcolm's part. Yet it is, unfortunately, the entirety of his position.
   
   But you'll find this book a cracking good read nonetheless.



5. I read this book along time ago and still retain alot of what I learned from it. There is no beating around the bush in this from the beginning he tells of his life as it happened. He tells of an early career in crime to his time in prison and he does not attempt to sugarcoat anything. He does explain his reasoning for having done what he had done in his youth, but he does not claim to be innocent.
   He did manage to find a better way to fight his enemies during his incarceration, and anyone who has ever seen any footage of Malcolm X will understand what I mean. The man was a very acticulate and confrontational speaker. He was the spark that ignited the engine of the civil rights movement in many respects. The civil rights movement began as far back as pre-civil war and was slow to develop with minor progress for each generation. Malcolm was the man brave enough to say enough and to make his voice heard over the many voices of the nation that tried to rise over him.
   Here is a man that took it upon himself to correct a society that had become accepting of the crimes of their ancestors and simply ignored them. It is only a stonesthrow back in time if you think about it and yet it is painful to imagine people could be so cruel.
   I recommend this to anyone who hasn't read it as it is an excellent book and is a document of the life of a man who managed to play a pivotal role in changing the way America viewed itself.

5 comments about Because They Hate: A Survivor of Islamic Terror Warns America.

1. This was a very eye opening book about a subject that our schools and media don't talk about. I highly recommend this book and even bought the audio book version for my friend that doesn't like to read. I wish all of our government officials would read this book before meeting with countries in the Middle East.



2. All I can say is WAKEUP Canada.Open your eyes and ears to a very real threat to your freedoms.



3. Brigette Gabriel does an awesome job of showing what Islam really intends to do on a world scale. I have been researching Islam for over a year, and this book only adds the personal testimony of a person who has lived through the result of ignorance regarding Islamic intentions. I anxiously await the next book to be written. If Brigette comes to my area I will definitely go to see and hear her myself.
   Pastor Dave Aune



4. Brigitte Gabriel paints a grim picture of the islamic threat to U.S. and western civilization. Along with Noni Darwish's book Now, They Call Me Infidel Because They hate sounds an alarm that Americans should heed. Gabriel, a Lebanese Christian journalist details her experience under the Islamic Jihad that created the civil war in Lebanon. She also reveals that even the Christian maronite parochial school which she attended demonized the Jews and the Israeli's. So what else is new. The Christian faith continues to demonize the Jews. During WWII The Catholic Pope was the first foreign state to recognize Hitler. The Pope made a deal with him. If the nazi's left the jews converted to Catholicism alone, the Pope Vatican would turn a blind eye to the suffering of Europe's Jewish citizens. Now that Chritians too are under attack, they are sympathizing somewhat with their Jewish brethren. Too often in the past they were sacrificed as expendable to placate the hateful policies of other countries and nationalities including the Nazi torture and persecution of an entire people and civilization. Roosevelt knew what was happening and did nothing about it. Now as a nation we cannot afford to ignore the evil intentions of Israel's Muslim neighbors. As she says in her book "First comes saturday and then comes Sunday." This Arab phrase means "First we kill all the Jews. Then we kill all the Christians." Make no mistake. This is the fundamentalist intention. They are using our bill of rights against us. Spewing hateful speech to incite violence, they cite their first amendment rights to prevent any government action to stop it. While I applaud Brigette Gabriel's bravery in coming forward to speak publically about this threat, I do think she has gone a bit far. After reading these two books I not only support ethnic profiling, but I encourage it. Controlling discourse on campus and religious institutions is another ball of wax. Once we start down that slipery slope who knows where limitations on our 1st amendment rights of free speech, free press, and free religion will stop. Since the essence of a democracy is freedom of speech, press, and assembly, we could end up selling our American soul to preserve it. Then what would we have saved. Perhaps, more important would be to give equal funding and access to speakers like Noni Darwish and Brigitte Gabriel on college campuses and other forums. Gabriel's characterization of the entire democratic leadership as indictable for treason goes a bit too far. These comments indicate that she doesn't really understand the democratic process set up in this country. I gave this book 4 stars instead of 5 for three reasons. First, that she draws the line too far. Second, her prose is often repetitive, and thirdly, it is not elegant. I still think that this book is a must read for every American. This woman is in constant danger because of what she states publically. I think that she and Noni Darwish are alive only becasue they are women who are viewed as inconsequential in the Muslim culture. Assasinating her would give her credence. She lays to rest the western belief that female suicide bommbers are participating out of feelings of desperation. They are participating after being harrassed and cajoled and accused of honor violations for which they will be killed. Particularly telling is the incident of the Arab girl raped by her two brothers and then killed by her mother because she had sexual intercourse outside of marriage. Her mother suffocated and beat her for 20 minutes before she died. How can we ever hope to understand this culture and win it over by conciliatory means? They understand and respect only force and strenght. Gabriel puts and end to the notion of Islam as a peaceful religion. The issue presented is where do we draw the line to protect ourselves without giving up completely what makes us Americans. First, I think we should use the Israeli Mossad for security profiles and follow their recommendations on profiling. The petrochemical complex already uses ex mossad agents for their security. One is unaware of this heightened security when entering the plants, but it is there. Like England we need more video surveillance. We must pay senior intelligence and FBI agents competitive salaries so that we don't have agencies run almost entirely by 'junior pilots", because the senoir people have left for more lucrative jobs in private industry. We must see the fundamentalist muslim threat as immediate and real. We must be politically incorrect at times to deal with the danger. College campuses must remain vigilent that professors treat students of any faith or nationality with equal respect. If Arab professors present a pro Muslim viewpoint equal class time should be given to talented speakers presenting the opposing view. Thus, students will not be unduly influenced by a polarizing Jihadist, anti-western, anti-Israeli view. Most troubling to me was the chapter on the fifth column at college campuses. The students who will be our future leaders and captians of industry are at a very impressionable age. It is too easy to imbue a professor with mentor like qualities held up as an ideal to be followed. We must also be vigilent on the true recipients of charitible donations. However, when it comes to Mosques preaching hatred and death, we must tred carefully. Any law abridging such speech could also be used to curtail legitimate government critisizm, a hallmark of democracy. Certainly, Barak Obama's pastor's speech would fall under this umbrella. I deplore what the Rev. Wright and his progeny have said, but I defend his right to say it. Where should we draw the line and how? Gabriel gives some suggestions, but I think they go to far. I do agree with her section on profiling. We could present more options for patriotism in classrooms such as reciting the pledge of allegiance. We could keep books such as this one and the Darwish book on school and public library shelves. We could also place the books on recommended reading lists on high school and college campuses so that students are assured of getting both sides of the argument. Right now they are primarily hearing the pro-muslim side only. Keep up the good work, Brigitte. However, I think



5. This is a very personal, emotional book to read - you have to prepare yourself. It is so moving, visual and shocking. Brigitte is an excellent writer and really knows how to express herself - you feel as though you're right there in the bomb shelters with her and her parents as they suffer unimaginable horrors. I'm so glad I was able to read this book because it is a real warning for America not to fall into complacency - that we all need to stay vigilant and know and understand our enemies. This story is so inspiring; it'll make you feel like you can accomplish anything after reading what she went through to beat the odds and become an American success story.

5 comments about Gandhi An Autobiography: The Story of My Experiments With Truth.

1. I enjoyed this book. I wish this book was written sometime after India's independence as more important events unfolded later. I also think that the reader needs background on India and its culture to understand some chapters. Overall, a good one!



2. This book, the autobiography of Mohandas k. Gandhi, the father of modern India, is a must read. if you have any interest in Gandhi, non violence or just want a glimpse into the life of a spiritually guided person, then this book if a must read.



3. After hearing Mahatma Gandhi's grandson speak at University of Florida, this book was especially meaningful. If only all our world leaders would employ his wisdom!



4. Gandhi An Autobiography: The Story of my Experiments with Truth, is a culmination of the life of one of the most famous peaceful revolutionaries and supporters of non-violence. The book is basically an entire list of the life experiences of Gandhi, all of which prove to contribute to his spiritual growth, and in turn, each go to influence his way of thinking. Gandhi's autobiography reveals a vast array of experiments he performed throughout his life, leading to his praise of truth as the ultimate underlying principal, contributing to his adaptation of celibacy (brahmacharya), adherence to fasting, and development of Satyagraha: his concept of non-violent firmness.
   Gandhi's autobiography stretches back to his youth in exploring all of his life experiences. Gandhi's inclusion of all aspects of his life in his autobiography illustrates the idea that each and every experience becomes an influence; which, in Gandhi's case, means influences leading to the development of a concept of non-violence to spear-head the Indian journey for Independence.
   The strength in Gandhi's autobiography lies in his adherence to truth even as he tells his life story. Gandhi hides nothing, allowing this display of raw truth to help readers examine Gandhi's uncensored ideas and thoughts, making it possible to understand what Gandhi was thinking in even some of the most significant moments in his life.
   The main weakness in Gandhi's autobiography, however, is his obvious omission of information where the information is most definitely needed. In order to fully understand a large number of chapters, an understanding of India and its culture is necessary, but not provided. Gandhi also seems to assume that readers have knowledge of the political situation in India, so if you lack any historical knowledge, you will find yourself somewhat confused. Because Gandhi's autobiography radiates the idea that every experience is an influence for the person he eventual becomes, it obviously is a challenge to include every experience and spend an adequate amount of time discussing them. But his choice to omit quite a few particularly significant experiences will not go unnoticed. He does not, for example, spend any time describing his experiments in South Africa, and instead instructs readers to consult other works. Lack of background information regarding people who Gandhi introduces and lack of historical information on the movements he involves himself in, may lead to an incomplete illustration of Gandhi's life.
   At the conclusion of Gandhi An Autobiography: The Story of my Experiments with Truth, you are left with the desire to take a trip to the library, because you have surely reached the conclusion that there is much more to know about the teacher and leader who made the world aware of India's struggle for independence. The autobiography gives you an in-depth look into the mind of one of the most influential non-violent role models that the world has seen, with a detailed understanding of the steps necessary to try to follow in Gandhi's footsteps if you so desire. Gandhi's autobiography leaves a lot out, but it also leaves you with a strong desire to find out more.



5. This is easily the most powerful book I have ever read. Gandhi does a great job of telling the story in his life in such a way that not only tells a story, but teaches lessons that go along with it. The title explains a lot, considering that Gandhi considered his entire life to be an expirement with the truth.
   
   He is very open about the mistakes that were made (such as his marraige and bigotry at an incredibly young age) and details how he took those mistakes to make his life as consistently honest as possible. The way he organized people to non-violence in two terrible situations in Africa and India are legendary, but the way he brings it home to the individual is under-rated, to say the least.
   
   Gandhi teaches that it doesn't take an army to learn the truth, nor does it take an army to become a part of that truth. His story explains that an individual dedicated to the empowerment of honesty and love can overcome any violence or hatred that can exist. It is within this context that one can use this book to change themselves.
   
   These ideas used in an individual's every day life will lead to the understanding that love is more powerful than hatred, and honesty more powerful than lies. His examples of these ideas and proof that they are true is the most inspiring part of this book.
   
   Even for those of us not religious (like myself) his use of religion is also motivating. He teaches lessons from religions and explains how to use this understanding as a way to love people of opposite religions rather than fighting them.
   
   I will leave the indivudal stories to Gandhi himself, but his life is something everyone in the world would benefit from knowing.

No comments about A Thousand Hills: Rwanda's Rebirth and the Man Who Dreamed It.