5 comments about My Awakening: A Path to Racial Understanding.

1. This book is probably the most important I've ever read. It is very difficult to find, a testament to the type of suppression that has followed the auther David Duke throughout his entire life.
   
   The book jumps back and forth between details of the author's life and research on sociology, anthropology, history and genetics; all of it is carefully referenced. The transformation of the American media is shown clearly and factually. Foreign influences with nefarious purposes have been shown to exist at the heads of all major newspaper publications in the entire country. Most of the legislation which has brought down the national average IQ, school systems and neighborhoods are exposed. It was all blurry before I picked up this book and it is now frighteningly clear. Everybody should read this book if we are to survive.
   
   Those who have sought to discredit and bash the author have been shown as the criminals they are. David Duke has never commited a violent or criminal act in his life, yet he was almost murdered on three occasions. Why? There is not a racial slur or virulent phrase in this entire book. The message is purposeful, positive and redeeming. Open your mind and give it a read, it's well worth it.



2. I read David Duke's semi-autobiographical "My Awakening."
   
   This is 3 books in one:
   
   1)the Duke story
   2)a study of race and society
   3)a study of the Jewish question, including their dual code of morality, the non-Semitic origin of the Ashkenazi Jews, reasons why the accepted Holocaust story may be wrong, and the Jewish role in communism and the New World Order.
   
   The portion on race and IQ cites the same experts as "The Bell Curve," but is nowhere near as dry or boring. This is easy reading because of the conversational tone of the book, and the very well-presented charts.
   
   So, is Duke synonymous with hatred? Yes, because if you believe him, powerful people will hate you.



3. At last, a book which explains the most important issue of modern times in a way which will help rather than hinder the cause. Most racially-conscious writers are full of such spleen and venom that they overplay their hand and turn off those they wish to convert. Duke doesn't. He has clearly thought deeply about this issue and holds no hatred for anyone. He just demands the same rights for his own people that non-white "community leaders" demand for theirs. If every American read this book, Duke would be the next president.



4. MY AWAKENING is a captivating book that exemplifies how a student is to do a research [theme] paper. Dr. Duke used autobiography to structure his awakening that was thoroughly researched, cross-checked and referenced. His writing engages and draws you deeper into each of two topics using the facts and evidence; while his multiple sourced examples test the credibility of his sources. Here you will see how racial differences evolve in geographically separated populations; and you will see how influential zionist leaders can maintain their culture of excusiveness while directing others to multiculturalism. The author studied, awoke and was surprised by the discoveries.



5. I read this book in high school before I joined the Army. I did not understand a lot of his points or rather did not want to understand his accusations about Jews because I come from a strong Christian family. I spent 4 years in the service and because of that I had plenty of down time to research about everything going on with America and why we are in this war still! So now I find this book on Amazon 5 years later and have always reflected certain information toward this book. I find it very informative and balanced.In my final opinion I think every one should read this and take most if not all of this book into consideration.

5 comments about To the Castle and Back (Vintage).

1. To those of us deeply involved in Czech history or culture, this is an essential book. It's a fascinating insider's look at the choices a dissident was forced to make when he became President of a postcommunist country. But for people not deeply familiar with Havel's work, this is not the place to start. First read "Open Letters" and "Disturbing the Peace," then John Keane's (similarly unconventional) biography.



2. I just finished Vaclav Havel's memoir, To the Castle and Back, and the harsh feelings I had towards the book as I began it dissipated a bit by the end. It has an odd structure, equal parts an interview done concerning events before he was president, memos he wrote while he was president, and recollections he wrote some years after he left office, all interspersed randomly among each other, with occasional repetitions of texts. As a biography, it's a failure. By the end of the book, I still know little of the history of the Czech Republic, or what Havel did while in office. Readers looking for that should go to Havel's book, Disturbing the Peace. That book remains one of the most influential books I've ever read, and I still count myself as lucky for stumbling on it in a friend's bookshelf.
   
   As a piece of literature, though, To the Castle is a success. Fundamentally, it casts Havel (and all writers and activists) as a sort of postmodern Sisyphus. He writes in depth and at length about his difficulty getting motivated and starting to write. He write, to the point of being whiney, about his intense doubt that his writing and political projects will ever achieve their high objectives. Indeed, he seems to argue that writing is fundamentally futile: "man will carry the complete truth about himself to the grave." And yet Havel write, driven on by the "somewhat ridiculous" idea that "the world desperately needs the work in question, and will fall apart if it doesn't appear." I too like writing and thinking yet have intense self-doubt, and so I get great joy seeing that someone way more gifted than I like Havel suffers the same. I agree with Havel's quote: "I sometimes ask myself whether I did not originally begin to write... only to overcome my essential experience of inappropriateness... in order to be able to live with those feelings."
   
   Yet somehow the Sisyphean task of the writer gives him meaning: "He simply tried to capture the world and himself more and more exactly through words, images, or actors, and the more he succeeds, the more aware he is that he can never completely capture either the world or himself... but that drives him to keep trying." Imagine Sisyphus as conscious of the absurdity of his task, yet still drawing meaning from it. Camus would be proud.
   
   This book is also a lament, for it is perhaps his last, and is certainly written as such. Havel is sending a message: he did his best to write himself into the world, but ultimately failed to communicate his internal self. Like a mortal Sisyphus in old age realizing he will never reach the top of this hill, nor could have.



3. I enjoyed this book, but I don't believe it is for everyone. Two themes give this work its form: a Heideggerian commitment to the notion that his Being over the past 15 years is best disclosed by sharing the "average everydayness" of his former presidential responsibilities; and a profound physical and spiritual exhaustion with his role as fairytale hero. For hardcore fans of Havel, and for scholars engaged in close examinations of the post-communist era in Central and Eastern Europe, there be gems here. But you have to rummage for them. For the reader looking for a memoir possessed of the usual pleasures of clear chronology and steady narrative, To the Castle and Back will be extraordinarily frustrating. One other word of caution: I found the few passages devoted to Havel's first wife, Olga, pretty hard to take. My lasting impression of Havel's account, though, is of a man who worked prodigiously for the good of his country: One reads over and over again how he readily spent his meager political capital to remind citizens there and everywhere of the big picture issues. Perhaps nobody has ever played the role of public intellectual quite so well.



4. Vaclav Havel communicates with the open-hearted clarity of a good friend who happens to be a world-class writer. I find myself using his perspectives as I go about my life, far as it is from the great transitions of the Czech and Slovak nations from totalitarianism to democracy. Paul Wilson's translation is superb. Vaclav Havel deserves his reputation as a very human hero.



5. What Havel lacks in chronological narrative structure, he makes up for in depth and candor. In the intro to the book, he acknowledges that this is not a traditional memoir and he encourages the reader to move on to the next section should he or she become bogged down in and bored by the intricacies of Czech politics. To quote Havel in his introduction, he writes, "[W]hether you read it whole or piecemeal, I will be satisfied if you feel this book has given you something of value."
   
   As a professional writer, Havel demonstrates the ability to express his wit and his gravitas with equal quality. This comes through even in translation. Havel breaks up his story into sections: memos between him and his closest staff while he was president of Czechoslovakia (and later the Czech Republic), reflections from his then-current perspective and finally, answers to questions from a Czech journalist. The three parts are intercalated with each other throughout the text and give a very unique and enriching story of one of the 20th century's most fascinating world leaders.

5 comments about Dead Certain: The Presidency of George W. Bush.

1. Although this book is less an account of personality and more a historical look at Bush's presidency, Draper does a good job of summarizing his career and provides an accurate and comprehensive narrative of the man's life. I found a lot of insight into his career prior to his candidacy in 2000 and also on the events that unfolded while I was deployed in 2004 and 2005.



2. The Bush presidency still has almost a year to go, and already the stream of "definitive" books on his presidency is starting to trickle down.
   
   In "Dead Certain: The Presidency of George W. Bush" (480 pages), author Robert Draper paints a very closely researched picture of the Bush presidency. It appears that Draper had unprecedented access to the President and those around him. Draper spends very little time on what it is that brought Bush to the presidency, his previous life as governor of Texas and owner of the Texas Rangers are being dealt with in a couple of pages. Even more questionable is why the 2004 general election and its aftermath, leading to the Supreme Court's decision in Gore vs. Bush, is taken care of in 1 paragraph! In contrast to that, the author brings in great details the brutal 2000 Republican primaries, in which McCain unexpectedly won New Hampshire (when the day before the election the Bush entourage found itself with an extra hour or two on its hands, they decide to go bob-sledding on the spur of the moment!). The author doesn't hide his criticism of the war in Iraq. The 4400 Project (which was to restore up to pre-war levels of electricity with 4,400 megawatts of electricity by Oct. 1, 2003) was one of the many failures, and later $18.4 billion emergency funding was requested to get supply up to 6,000 megawatts. The author notes dryly: "The money came. But the 6,000 megawatts never did. Not by June 2004.Or by 2005. Or 2006. Or 2007."
   
   In all, this is a pleasant read. The author has done his home work even if for some reason he is selective in what episodes to cover or not to cover. But the book finishes in an open-ended way, not surprising since this book came out 16 months before the end of Bush's presidency.



3. As Mr. Draper stated, "Bush's virtues and his vices were one and the same." This statement pretty much sums it up for every person that has been our president. Mr. Draper has done a fine job of helping to make President Bush a more rounded character. However, I would not recommend the author's book as the definitive analysis of this controversial man. In fact, there is no such book that I am aware that can claim to be so. Mr. Draper's book has plenty of areas that could have been covered in more detail, but will have to be left to other historians. Ultimately, if you appreciate political books, you'll likely enjoy this one. The story moves along very well, is informative and quite entertaining.



4. Wolffe states in his review that "Here is a president who boasts of reading around 100 books a year, promotes reading standards and No Child Left Behind, graduated from Yale and Harvard, and is married to a librarian. Yet he thinks he can't learn lessons by reading. You can almost hear the critics scoff."
   
   Perhaps Wolffe needs to learn to comprehend what he's read a bit better. Bush is correct: there are just some things one can't learn by reading; instead one has to learn by doing. Wolffe's failure to comprehend this renders anything else he has to say as unreadable, as, how can one trust a reviewer who doesn't understand what they're reading to begin with?
   
   People should read this book with an open mind and no preconceived ideas about who George Bush is. Only in that way will they truly understand him.



5. Dead Certain is a fantastic first attempt to objectively judge the GW Bush years. That will not be an easy task for a decade or more. People will argue about Iraq, the deficit, Katrina, and so much more for decades to come. Yet Draper did a fine job of walking the tightrope of objectivity, so much as is possible. Well written with just enough new nuggets to make it worthwhile reading even for those who follow politics.

4 comments about Eugene V. Debs: Citizen and Socialist (The Working Class in American History).

1. PG 203 & 208 reference Governor Davis H. Waite. The author mis-spells Davis as David, a very common mistake for researchers and historians.

   Otherwise good information here on most Debs topics. Read more on Debs & Waite in my future book. Frank S. Waite




2. The book was clearly not written by an author, but by a researcher. The book has lots of info, but sometimes tends to get off subject, and is sometimes a bit hard to follow. A good read none the less. A very interesting man and that translates into a good book.



3. He was dubbed an undesirable citizen by so-called progressive Teddy Roosevelt. The best biography of Debs to date. It shows his working class background and radical roots in his family. You can see his evolution from democrat and trade unionist to socialist and industrial unionist. His frustration with mainstream politics leads to his trade union agitation. The failure of the AFL railroad brotherhoods to work together spurs him on to create an industrial union of all railroad workers called the American Railway Union. While in jailed in Illinois after the Pullman Strike of 1894 is crushed he becomes a socialist. He helps unites the various factions into the Socialist Party of America in 1901. That same year he merges the broken ARU with the Western Federation of Miners to form the American Labor Union, which adopts socialism. He helps form the Industrial Workers of the World in 1905 which seeks to organize all workers into One Big Union. He leaves the IWW when in rejects politics. During WWI while other socialists give in to nationalism he remains militantly anti-war. In 1917 he refuses to support America's enterance into the war and remains undecided on the Russian Revolution. While in prison for trying to subvert the war effort he recieves over a million votes for president. His party disintegrates in dispute between Hawks and Doves, and reformers and revolutionaries. A fascinating story.



4. Here you will learn about Debbs the union activist and organizer, Debbs the socialist party organizer and Debbs the husband, brother, friend and lover. And you might get the impression that the advocacy and political activity of Debbs must be measured almost exclusively by the impact it had on the unions, the socialist party and his intimates. I had hoped to read more about Debbs' impact beyond these circles. How did the nation look on Debbs, especially during his presidential campaigns? What did the other major and minor party candidates make of him? These questions remain largely unanswered by the books end.

   At times, the book treats Debbs' presidential campaigns almost in passing. The campaigns are not treated as events interesting primarily because of the impact they had on the nation. If the US thought Debbs dangerous enough to incarcerate him during WW1, it is difficult to imagine why a history depicting Debbs' larger political and cultural influence would be difficult to produce.

   The book describes well how Debbs framed his leftism in an American voice: how he found within the discourse of individualism a foundation for socialism. But, of course, that direction was all but forgotten after the benighted enthusiasm for the Bolsheviks.

1 comments about Yeltsin: A Life.

1. Colton has provided a smart, well-researched and well-written account of a pivotal figure in Russian history.

5 comments about After Fidel, Updated Edition: Raul Castro and the Future of Cuba's Revolution.

1. This book is mostly about Fidel. There are only two chapters that hone in on Raul. Even Latell, who surely knows more than he could reveal in his own book, didn't reveal too much. He avoided the Bay of Pigs. He didn't say much about Cuba's interference in other Central and South American countries.
   
   Still, it's a good read for laymen wanting to know the basics about Castro and Cuba. Who will take over the island once Fidel dies? Even Latell could only speculate, mentioning a few top ministers from the brothers' group (Raulistas).
   
   Although I didn't gain much insight about Raul, I did learn interesting tidbits about Fidel: the entire clan were illigitimate. Fidel himself has his girlfriend (and their children) set aside. That both Fidel and Raul have a deep hidden side should be no surprise. After Fidel gave the reigns over to Raul in August 2006 there were rumors that Raul would be a ruthless dictator worse than his brother. That hasn't occurred.



2. After Fidel: The Inside Story of Castro's Regime and Cuba's Next Leader.(Book review): An article from: Military Review
   
   After reading the Spanish version, I decided to read the English version for comparison. There were many translations into Spanish that were not familiar to me.
   
   The author provides insides into the Castros' way of thinking of which probably very few are aware. The information provided makes it easier to
   discuss Castro with Cuban-American friends that hate his guts.
   
   The book concentrates on behavior and time-wise jumps around. To get a
   better understanding of events in an orderly time sequence, other readings are necessary.
   
   I recommend this book to anybody that is interesting in learning the inner feelings that make Fidel and Raul 'tick.' I never realized what an egomaniac 'gachupin' he was until reading this book.



3. I bought this book because its title caught my attention.What's gonna happen after Fidel? Mr Latell's account is very well researched and documented.His insight and instincts really gives the book a good "taste".I guess after many years watching a person you get an edge over a reporter or historian.His depiction and study of Raul Castro and his relation with Fidel is very accurate since i have heard basically the same opinions from people that used to live in Cuba.Good book and good work by the author.



4. As a college professor, if not as a high ranking CIA, one expects an author to investigate what he writes and not be sloppy in his research. In the first page of his first chapter, the author attributes to José Martí a well known poem by Puerto Rican poet Lola Rodríguez de Tió. In English the first verses would be: Cuba and Puerto Rico are the two wings of a bird that receives flowers and bullets in the same heart.
   The problem with that first impression is that one can not help but ask, how credible this book really is.



5. The author is very astute and informed. This book will open your eyes to the total affect Castro had on the world. Includes a partial biogaphy explaining the personal side of Castro that many aren't aware of. Worth the read.

5 comments about The Prince of Providence: The Rise and Fall of Buddy Cianci, America's Most Notorious Mayor.

1. Well, perhaps not everyone does. But as this book outlines in great detail, Buddy was quite a character. He was the huge push (or battering ram?) behind the proverbial renaissance of Providence. PVD has a long way to go, but some would argue that it is definitely better off after Buddy's term in office. Besides, how many cities have had a convicted felon with his own marinara sauce in City Hall? Stanton has written a meticulously researched and engaging book about one of the most interesting mayors to come along in quite a while. Whether you're from Providence or just passing through (ahem college kids), pick this one up and learn about the man behind the myth.



2. 
   This book is a fascinating look at politics, corruption and the enigma of Buddy Cianci. Thoughtful and balanced, it shows both sides of a bright, funny, and charismatic mayor whose impact reaches beyond his city. It's all about good and evil in the same person. Charm, power, and political realities. A great read.



3. A fascinating view of a Mayor who engaged in boosterism to sell his city, and himself. Very helpful to those interested in studying styles of government and a great read.
   
   Jim Fiorentini Mayor, Haverhill, MA



4. I know very little about New England or Rhode Island. I'm not terribly interested in politics. I came to this book in a roundabout way. I had never been aware of Buddy Cianci until I happened to see a musical at the New York International Fringe Theatre Festival in 2003 titled BUDDY CIANCI. While the musical wasn't very good, I thought the story was fascinating and that in Buddy Cianci the authors certainly had a character who was big enough to sing. Here was a guy who was a scary crook that everyone loved. Here was a mayor whose popularity was never higher than just after he was indicted a second time. He had been indicted previously, pleaded guilty to assault (he bound and tortured a man he claimed was his ex-wife's lover) and had to step down as mayor, only to run again and be re-elected! So of course I pounced when I saw this book in the bookstore. I was not disappointed. Mike Stanton's THE PRINCE OF PROVIDENCE is jaw-dropping reading as it traces Cianci's rise to power and his outrageous machinations to keep his power. Stanton's book is very detailed and objective. This is not a hatchet job. He gives equal time to all sides. In one chapter I would be rooting for Buddy and in the following chapter rooting for his enemies. This is that kind of book. Buddy Cianci is that kind of guy. The book has been sold to the movies and should make a terrific film. (But what actor could possibly do justice to the title character?) There are times when the book seems on the verge of becoming a Yankee MIDNIGHT IN THE GARDEN OF GOOD AND EVIL (which I consider a compliment). THE PRINCE OF PROVIDENCE is consistently entertaining and has a lot to say about America and the times we live in. Four stars.



5. RI is such a secular little world where everyone DOES know everyone else. Buddy played those connections to the hilt, rebuilding a city and lining his own pockets at the same time. This is a great study of a guy who, had he not been so affable, would have been regarded as the nastiest of crooks. But instead while he wallows in the Federal Pen, his legions of fans and supporters remain steadfast. Stanton does a superb job of capturing the uniqueness of Rhode Island; the Italianness, the corruption, the general air of "fuhgheddaboudit, they're all crooks". Don't rule out Buddy Part III, this is but the first installment of a very interesting man.

5 comments about Hell to Pay: The Unfolding Story of Hillary Rodham Clinton.

1. Since Hillary's own "Living History" was such a sterile and lifeless academic exercise - at least compared to Obama's "Dreams of My Father," or even to Bill's "My Life" -- and thus did powerful little to reveal the real person behind the "political persona," one is forced to stoop (almost embarrassingly so) to "anti-Hillary tracts" (such as I thought this one would be), to peel back the veneer covering the "Hillary Rodham" mystique.
   
   Whether intentional or not, much to my surprise, this book is NOT an altogether uncomplimentary analysis of Mrs. Clinton's life. With many rich details that highlight the good, the bad, and the ugly -- along the often bumpy road her life has taken -- this volume, quite adequately "fills in the blanks" about who the real Mrs. Hillary Rodham Clinton is.
   
   Even though one can clearly see from the title that it was intended to appeal to the "I Hate Hillary Club," it turns out to be amazingly straightforward and free of the usual slander, political vitriol, and below the belt personal jabs that one normally associates with, and expects of books with titles of this sort. Nothing could have been more satisfying than to realize that I had misjudged this book based solely on its cover. I had indeed discounted its value, expecting it to be little more than a carefully disguised "attack ad." And even though much of the juicier aspects of its content seem to have been "culled" from other more respectable sources, it is still much more than just an "attack ad in disguise." It is meaty, coherent, and sticks tenaciously to the main task of trying to unravel, who the person behind the Hillary political persona really is. In short, those looking for an "attack ad" disguised as a book: Well, I am here to tell you, this ain't it. This is not the "National Enquirer's" version of the ex-First Lady's life. Ms. Olson can think and write, and has very high standards for her craft and exercises them all quite well here.
   
   The high points of the book lie in the careful way the author uses the details of her subject's life to outline, against the backdrop of the many layers of American society, the essential elements of Hillary's character and the motivation for her often difficult life choices. The ex-First Lady evolves from a "Goldwater Girl," to a "wide-eyed 1960s Leftist Radical," to Bill's "Hippy gal-pal," to a university Law professor, to a partner in a major law firm, to the ambitious "power grabbing money hungry" political predator that she is now thought by many to be. In the best of the American tradition, she "clawed her way to the top of the food chain."
   
   The public portrait of her is as a person seemingly willing to cut whatever moral corners are needed to advance herself; to protect her Golden Goose (Bill); to grab the brass ring for herself (the U.S. Presidency), and in the end" to find financial security for herself and her family. However, the author is careful to note that she is much more complex than just this demeaning portrait. Hillary does a great deal of good along this very treacherous and tortuous path, especially in improving education in Arkansas, with the Children's Defense Fund, steering Bill's campaigns and comebacks to victory, showing uncommon strength in "facing down" one scandal after another, and in raising consciousness about women issues.
   
   The low point of the book is watching the author get stuck chasing her own tail: Trying to graft her own self-created "Leftist Radical" image onto Hillary. No matter how many Saul Alinsky epigrams she uses, the graft simply does not "take." And the reason is because of the much larger, much deeper picture that the author's own analysis shows the ex-First Lady to be: Hillary, more than anything else, is an evolving political animal that is no longer easy to pigeonhole politically, morally or ethically.
   
   Yet, rather sadly, she misses her own most important lesson and contribution by failing to understand that the corruption of Mrs. Hillary Rodham Clinton, when seen in relief, is little more than a general critique of the American political way of life. For as she so aptly demonstrates, there is nothing unique about Hillary, her personality, her life choices, or her life journey that would make her stand out from the rest of us as predisposed towards political corruption, or towards becoming a "moral retrograde." Yet, as has been the case with so many others of American politicians, she lurched from "Right wing" idealist, to "Left wing" idealist, to a "co-opted and corrupt centrist," to a "bought-and-paid-for" pseudo-liberal democrat, and back into the closet again as a "Right wing Republican in "Democratic clothing."
   
   As a template of how to go from political naiveté to political maturity, Hillary's journey from idealist to corrupt political opportunist, could serve as THE model for anyone who gets caught up in the sausage grinding machinery of American government and politics. The sad fact is that the most likely, and the most probable outcome for any of us, is that we will be consumed by it, and will come out on the other side, grinded into unrecognizable moral mince meat -- a corrupt shell of our previous moral selves. Quite simply, we have a political system that eats and digests its young and spits them out as fertilizer for the next generation.
   
   What was most sobering about the book is that Hillary is the classic case in point. Her life's journey is an object lesson in what not to do. Through her, we can see how truly scary it is that for all but a handful of us, dealt the same hand in life as she, but for the grace of God, we too undoubtedly would have ended up in the same morally corrupt and bankrupt cul de sac that the ex-First Lady now finds herself in: with "unearned riches," dubious but exaggerated accomplishments, hanging on to a failed marriage, and still grasping for a meaningless brass ring, called the U.S. Presidency.
   
   While this is far from a balanced treatment, Hilary's own glossed-over treatment left the door wide-open for a hardnosed assessment, and this is it. Five stars



2. One of the best reviews I have read on this personality, and I have read seven books. Underlines the development of her radicalization in politics and how her dysfunctional family of orgin undergirds her indefensible justification of her husband's sex addiction and thereby blaming Christians for his deeds.



3. In an effort to objectively write a key chapter in my book, America, You Will Be Destroyed !: Thus Saith The Lord - and Other Amazing Prophecies I read Ms. Olson's book as a part of my research. While many other Hillary books focused on her and husband Bill's scandals, Olson's book tried to capture the psyche and inner workings of the former First Lady.
   
   I felt that the little, seemingly insignificant or trivial details of her life and childhood helped me to paint a better mental picure of the driving forces in Hillary's life. As a former national and state licensed therapist, the little details helped me to create a case study snapshot. The influences of the feminist movement, her continued pursuit and espousal of radicalism and socialism, her upbringing under a driven father, the upheaval of the 60's, the me-generation of the 70's, the self-consciousness towards her own body (specifically her legs), the disdain and reproachful way Bill treated her... Whew, her issues of being driven, loathing of men in general, thirst for power/dominance and control, all make sense. as another reviewer said, "When peeling back the layers, we need to know this stuff to get at what makes Hillary tick."
   
   Looking at all the background and biographical details makes me realize (and hopefully others) that in her machinations we see clearly that she has not become more conservative or even centrist. She is a radical socialist to the core, and the most frightening thng in this revelation is that she seems to truly believe that she alone is right, that she alone is the people's champion and this sense of righteous indignation fuels her passionately to apire to the pinnacle of power at all costs.
   
   Like a true socialist, Hillary will do anything and everything to obtain power. She will reinvent herself over and over to do so. This book shows clearly that pragmatism is all a pose to make her attractive to the broad electorate. For her, the end (her obtaining power) will justify any means.
   
   By examing the actions/reactions of Hillary during key events such as Whitewater, the Travel agency firings, etc. The reader has an opportunity to see the venal, petty, cruel, vindictive, vulgar and violent side of a woman that is in a position of power and who is wanting yet more. Though all writer's have some non-altruistic motivation(s) for putting pen to paper, the work of digging out new details and reframing existing ones is crucial in the discovery phase of the case against HillaryThe Case Against Hillary Clinton (another work by a different author). There will be "Hell to Pay" if Hillary is elected.



4. This book was originally published by Barbara Olson in 1999 prior to her tragic death in the 9/11 terrorist attack on the pentagon. The timing is unfortunate in that if this book was just hitting the bookstores now (April 2008) I think it would prove to be Hillary's undoing, much as the Swift Boater's undid John Kerry with "Unfit for Command".
   
   This book is a real eye opener, following Hillary from her high school years through the Clinton White House to her election as a senator from New York. I think Ms. Olson might even have one up on Dick Morris in her documentation of Hillary's past. If even half of what Ms. Olson relates is true this woman should be sitting in a federal penitentiary somewhere, not running for President of the United States, a job she is about as qualified to perform as I am to perform open heart surgery. The book makes it clear that had she not been the First Lady of the United States she probably would have done some time in the slammer. From her shady an often illegal business deals and investments, to her blatant violation of the law by holding Hillarycare meetings in secrete, to funneling money to the PLO and Communist party, to lies, bribes, threats, insults, firings, perjury, blocking investigations, obstructing justice, hiring staff for the White House who couldn't get security clearances or required random drug testing, and altering public documents. Not to mention the fact that people who get too close to the Clintons have a bad habit of turning up dead. Ms Olson depicts Hillary is a one-woman crime wave.
   
   Shortly the American public will be asked to choose between Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama as the Democrat Party's nominee to run for the Presidency of the United States. Anybody who is even entertaining the though of voting for Mrs. Clinton needs to buy this book and read it! And quickly! It sure changed my mind.



5. "Hell to Pay" tells the story of Hillary Rodham Clinton's life, from childhood on. We see her behind the scenes in Arkansas and Washington, pushing Bill to fight back from his sometimes political problems and accept Dick Morris' advice, and helping to squelch reactions to Bill's infidelities.
   
   More significantly, Olson reminds readers of Hillary's role in "Travelgate," selecting Bill's Cabinet appointees (including Janet Reno and Joceyln Elders), "Filegate" (FBI files used to find dirt on Bush I and Reagan appointees), likely obstruction of justice in blocking access to Vince Foster's files until her staff removed selected papers, creating HillaryCare (antagonized many through secrecy, inflexibility, and leaving them out, overly complex - 1,300+ pages, holding back pay for her ghostwriter in "It Takes a Village" for revealing that Hillary did not write it, trying to push V.P. Gore to an across the street office so she could have his W.H. spot, supporting the "sale of the W.H." - $ for sleepovers, etc., the cattle futures scandal, etc.
   
   "Hell to Pay" also portrays Hillary's "never say die" nature, and bits of her temper.
   
   The only bad news about the book is that the author was killed in the 9/11 airliner crash into the Pentagon, and thus unable to update the material.

5 comments about Making Government Work.

1. 
   Rarely has Senator Fritz Hollings used his renowned wit to more devastating effect than when he was interviewed in 1990 on the ABC program, This Week with David Brinkley. Some weeks earlier he had reportedly bought a bargain-priced Korean-made suit on a field trip to Seoul. Given his role as a leading critic of Korean dumping in the American textile market, the alleged purchase was the sort of trivia that passed for news in some quarters. Although Hollings had arrived at the ABC studio expecting to talk about the federal government's worsening budget deficits, the interviewer Sam Donaldson lost no time in getting to the nub of the matter: whether or not Hollings was at that moment wearing the notorious suit.
   
   "Senator," Donaldson said, "you're from the great textile-producing state of South Carolina. Is it true you have a Korean tailor." Before Hollings could respond, Donaldson pressed on: "Let's see the label in there. What is the label in there?"
   
   "I bought it," Hollings replied, "the same place right down the street where, if you want to personalize this thing, you got that wig, Sam."
   
   The entire studio erupted. The blustery -- and bewigged -- Donaldson had had, if not his head handed to him, at least his tonsorial codpiece. But he was to exact a terrible revenge. Although Hollings had previously been a favorite on the program, Donaldson made sure that the courtly Southern Senator (and a man who still sports a full head of hair -- all evidently securely attached to its owner) was never invited back. Hollings had insulted a vain and not overly intelligent member of the new aristocracy of Big Foot media interviewers and for punishment he would be cast into outer darkness.
   
   In "Making Government Work," an autobiographical account of the steadily worsening problems that have engulfed the American political system in the last six decades, Hollings tells this anecdote as an illustration of how America has lost its way. Politicians, he writes, "are failing people because journalists too often are in the business of pursuing sideshows and not looking at the big picture." His point is, of course, irrefutable. But there is a deeper moral here that Hollings is too polite to state explicitly: while, by the standards of his trivia-obsessed profession, Donaldson might claim to have been within his rights in bringing up the alleged purchase, his insulting tone was utterly inexcusable. No decent person should have been addressed in such a way. That a member of the U.S. Senate should be so addressed bespeaks a degree of decay in the American body politic that bodes ill for the entire future of American democracy.
   
   In dissecting what has really happened to the American empire since its zenith in 1945, Hollings enjoys an unrivalled command of his material. Few if any political actors have played at such a high level for so long. A life-long Democrat, he was elected to the South Carolina legislature in 1948, became governor in 1958, and entered the U.S. Senate in 1966.
   
   Hollings's place in history rests on his leadership role in addressing three of the most serious policy problems of the era -- the federal budget deficits, the trade deficits, and the depradations of the K Street lobbying system. Readers of this book will not be disappointed in the space he allocates to each.
   
   Hollings is perhaps best known for his efforts to rein in the U.S. budget deficits. He had been a budget hawk since his days as governor of South Carolina and in the U.S. Senate in 1974 he hit the theme hard. He returned it to again in partnering two Republican Senators Phil Gramm and Warren Rudman in pushing through the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings balanced budget legislation of the 1980s. The legislation was severely weakened by a constitutional challenge in the Supreme Court. Remedial efforts have not worked because, in Hollings's account, successive presidential administrations -- Bush I, Clinton, and Bush II -- have "brazenly violated the law."
   
   The soaring budget deficits have been a contributory factor in an even bigger and less tractable problem, the trade deficits, but the main cause of the trade deficits, as Hollings shows, is a fundamentally wrong-headed American trade policy. He identifies fellow Democrat Jimmy Carter as the President who did most to put the United States on the the course to industrial emasculation and ever-increasing foreign indebtedness. The basic problem is that the present policy is merely "one-way free trade." America may open its markets all its wants but if other nations do not reciprocate, the net effect is that American industries bleed to death. With the American current account deficit now running consistently at around 5 percent of gross domestic product or more, the Bush administration has daily to go hat in hand to other nations, most notably China, to scrounge the finance to make ends meet. For somebody who remembers as clearly as Hollings does how things used to be, America's predicament is truly unbelievable. In 1966, the year Hollings entered the Senate, America enjoyed a _surplus_ of 0.4 percent of gross domestic product. Indeed the United States did not incur a single deficit in the 1960s and trade deficits did not become "baked in" to the American economic structure until the Carter era.
   
   Underlying the budget and trade problems is the lobbying problem. The Supreme Court again has much to answer for because, in the Buckley v. Valeo decision of 1976, it vitiated a major Congressional effort to stop dirty money polluting American democracy. Hollings is undoubtedly right that this ruling has not only utterly corrupted the American political process but has undermined the collegiality that once characterized the Senate. As Hollings points out, in earlier times when money played a less important role, Senators frequently spent the weekends in Washington and socialized with one another. That helped encourage a spirit of bipartisan cooperation in which Senators worked together -- much of the time at least -- in the national interest. These days they have no time anymore. They are on the road every weekend scrounging funds for their next campaign -- and in any case they are too busy outdoing one another's soundbites to focus on the sober task of legislating wisely.
   
   While the policy issues provide the meat in this important book, many readers will particularly relish Hollings's recollections of the fascinating personalities he has known over the years. He devotes a chapter, for instance, to the Kennedy family. Having met Robert Kennedy as far back as 1954, he forged a close relationship with the Kennedys that among other things resulted in his delivering his crucial anti-Catholic state to John F. Kennedy in 1960. Such was the degree of intimacy he enjoyed in the Kennedy circle that, as he records in this book, he more than once was treated to the off-color side of JFK's wit.
   
   He also has much to say about Robert Kennedy, whom he refers to throughout as Bob rather than Bobby. (Although that may seem slightly strange to the younger generation, Robert Kennedy generally styled himself as "Bob" in notes to friends. The press's preference for "Bobby" appears to have been inspired by JFK.) The Fritz-Bob relationship was evidently generally very cordial. But JFK's all-elbows younger brother more than once got Hollings's dander up. One telling episode concerns Robert Kennedy's run for the presidency in 1968. As a preparatory move, Kennedy decided to go on a tour of the nation publicizing some of the worst slums. One destination he planned to hit was in South Carolina -- at least it was until word reached Hollings's ears.
   
   Hollings writes:
   
   "As soon as I heard of Kennedy's plans, I picked up the telephone and told Kennedy I was working to do something about hunger in South Carolina.....He responded that everything had been arranged. I didn't understand the problem, he added....At that point I had had enough. 'Now look here,' I shouted. 'You go down there there, and I am going to get on a plane and go straight up to Harlem [in New York state, which Kennedy represented]. I am going to call every TV station, and then I am going to walk right through Harlem for four or five days, everywhere I can, and find every rat eating every child's eye out. And everywhere I go, I'm going to say why isn't Kennedy here? I am going to have a New York hunger expose at the very time you have yours in South Carolina.'"
   
   South Carolina was dropped from Kennedy's itinerary.
   
   Kennedy had learned what Sam Donaldson was to discover in 1990 -- that Fritz Hollings is not someone to tangle with lightly.
   
   "Making Government Work" is a wise, well written, and consistently absorbing analysis of the epochal crisis now facing the American nation.



2. Every so often while reading Fritz Hollings' autobiography I had to stop and ask myself a question: Was there really ever such a person in American politics? Someone who actually ran for office with the intention of making his city, state and country better places? Someone who would admit to mistakes -- and even to a little political expediency -- and who then tried to make up for it? Someone unafraid to make fun of Sam Donaldson to his face on national television?
   
   This book should have been published by a mass market imprint and renamed to sell to a larger audience. But it's part of Hollings' charm that he hides the fascinating and candid narrative of his political life behind a practical and well-meaning title. He really wanted government to work for the people -- as a state senator, governor and U.S. Senator -- and often he succeeded. Unfortunately, he never made it to the White House, but that's an American political story best told by a historian of our locked-up, frequently suffocating two-party duopoly. There isn't quite room for a Fritz Hollings in a system that requires the president to be the leader of his party before he is the leader of his country.
   
   I first met Senator Hollings when I was writing a book about NAFTA and there is no more intelligent, or acerbic critic of "free trade" dogma than he. But Hollings' book is replete with other engrossing stories where his honest differences with the mainstream of his constituency and of the Democratic Party placed him in the role of dissident. From racial integration in the early 1950s to Iraq in the early 20th century, we get the always forthright account -- sometimes first-hand -- of how political reality in America conflicts with political honesty. And through it all shines Hollings' utter lack of cynicism -- his determination to make the system work, no matter how corrupt it may be.
   
   Making Government Work ought to be read by anyone who wants to know more about Brown V. Board of Education (the little known story of the Summerton 60 was particularly enlightening for me), trade politics, campaign finance, and the Senate vote to authorize the invasion of Iraq. But even if you're not a student of recent American history, or if you disagree with Hollings on his positions, you'll enjoy his sense of humor. A great politician tries to inspire, of course, but a truly effective politician knows just when to make his audience laugh. Along with Robert Dole, Hollings is the best I've ever heard, with or without a script.



3. That's the title of the most practical "political" book you'll ever read. It is a user's manual for representative democratic government, written by former Senator Ernest F. (Fritz) Hollings of South Carolina, who spent six impressively productive decades in public service.As a reporter and campaign worker, I've known Fritz Hollings since he was the movie star-handsome "boy governor" of South Carolina in 1960 and JFK's invaluable ally in rounding up southern votes to gain the presidency. "Fritz" is a master politician; even more, he is a tireles public servant who truly tries to make government work for everyone he represents. Hollings has a razor sharp wit and a natural gift for memorable story-telling. He takes the reader behind backroom closed doors and into dark corners of political intrigue and describes how vitally important things get done. Hollings, who has been called "a visionary workhorse," focused throughout his career on putting government on a sound financial basis and promoting economic development and job creation. In a half century in Washington, he sponsored legislation on the budget, telecommunications, defense, trade, the environment and space exploration. In 1975, he pushed through the Automobile Fuel Economy Act and tried to launch an energy conservation revolution. In his presidential campaign a decade later, he sounded the earliest warnings against "outsourcing" and the loss of essential American manufacturing jobs overseas. Americans need to read and embrace his practical messages in this remarkable book and follow Fritz's lead. Richard J. Whalen www.richardwhalen.com



4. This book is almost like having a conversation with Sen. Hollings. I really miss him and hope we'll have Senators more like him in the next two elections.



5. I thoroughly enjoyed reading this candid assessment of contemporary politics. Really wish that he would have been able to share such wisdom/ that such wisdom would have been heeded while yet in elected office. Highly recommended for those who are deeply concerned about the future of our country & how corrupting money has been to the "body politic".

5 comments about Alexis de Tocqueville: A Life.

1. Hugh Brogan brings to light on of the most careful and subtle minds ever to ponder the origin and meanings of democracy in American history, the fall of the Ancien Regime, and the the basis for much of what passes for modern political thought.



2. I have been using Tocqueville's teachings in my college classes for years. However, it has been difficult to piece together exactly how his thought process came together. Brogan has brought this process together so beautifully in this book. Thank you.



3. He seems the unlikeliest person to write an incisive study of American democracy: a rather spoiled son of a French aristocrat of the ancien regime, and one who suffered from a sense of futility in his own life. But the amazing truth is the Alexis de Tocqueville was exactly the best qualified man to do exactly that. Scholarly, intelligent, a precise writer, de Tocqueville was the one to write an immortal study of American life that would become in time a classic. Best of all, he wrote his work not in his study, but after an intense journey through America itself in the early 1830s.
   Hugh Brogan's biography is an excellent study of this young author, and probably the very best modern biography. He uses de Tocquevilles' letters and other contemporary writings to illuminate the life and thought of the young aristocrat. And aristocrat he was, his father having stoutly stood by the French crown through its many vicissitudes (and nearly executed by the Jacobins for this). Young Alexis himself clung to the aristocracy until the turbulent days of the July Monarchy, when the Bourbons were unseated by the Orleanists. After this, the young writer lost much of his loyalty to the crown.
   Brogan's book is well written, and covers the political scene in France during de Tocqueville's time quite thoroughly. It is simply a book not to be missed about the world of this very talented young man, who proved to be so influential in studies about America and democracy in general.



4. This very enjoyable book is an excellent study of the very interesting French writer and politician Alexis de Tocqueville. Known best for his analysis of contemporary America, de Tocqueville is a notable figure in the history of political thought and a key source for the history of 19th century America. Brogan's Tocqueville is an essentially conservative figure. The descendent of relatively liberal aristocrats under the Ancien Regime, a number of whom were executed during the Terror, Tocqueville grew up in a legitimist household that detested the Bonapartist state and feared the radicalism that led to the Terror. Tocqueville, however, was too intelligent and preceptive to be a dogmatic Throne and Altar conservative. Following his famous trip to the USA in the early 1830s, he published Democracy in America, a case study in how a liberal society dedicated to political equality, property rights, and respect for law could produce lasting stability. Brogan points out well that Democracy in America, while about American democracy, was inspired by concerns about the role of democracy in France. At the same time, while Democracy affirmed a liberal vision, Brogan is careful to point out that it was a somewhat conservative version of liberalism and that Tocqueville did not really understand important aspects of American democracy. He didn't really understand the role of Congress and appears to have been completely clueless about the crucial role of the party system in providing stability.
   Tocqueville's failure to understand crucial aspects of the American democratic system would prove to be hindrance in Tocqueville's political career. Brogan devotes much of the book to a thoughtful description of Tocqueville the politician. More than anything else, his political career shows his essential conservatism. At times, his fear of unrest led him to support distinctly illiberal policies. Like many of his contemporaries, Tocqueville doesn't seem to understand the changes being brought about by the industrialization of Europe and to his last days, he had a fear of urban unrest and the nascent working class.
   Brogan shows very well that his last great work, the very interesting Ancien Regime and the French Revolution, should be interpreted in good measure as a critique of the Second Empire. Tocqueville's contemporary preoccupations clearly influenced the themes of his last major work.
   Tocqueville is often compared with Montesquieu and this is quite apt. Its clear from Brogan's account that Tocqueville's version of liberalism and democracy was one in the tradition of classical 18th century republicanism. He would definitely have preferred a society with democratic elements but also with institutions that allowed a powerful voice for a principled elite. This vision, shared by people like John Adams and even James Madison in his early constitutional proposals, essentially evaporated in the early years of the American democracy. Tocqueville was pursuing something that had really become anachronistic in his own time.
   Brogan writes affectionately but objectively about Tocqueville. This book is written very well with a nice combination of the primary narrative and enough background information to be informative but not over power the narrative.



5. I read "Democracy in America" when I was in college and wrote a paper looking at how the issues Tocqueville discussed in the 1830s played out in 1980s America. My conclusion was that many of his insights still had amazing relevance and yet his over-arching analysis of how America functioned as a democracy was pretty weak. He didn't understand the Presidency and Congress and completely neglected the role of political parties. However, his thoughts about American character; the striving for material success, the triumph of mediocrity, our refreshing practicality, the tyranny of majority and most amazingly how America and Russia would one day become polar opposite but competing superpowers were still all wonderfully relevant to modern American life.
   
   Hugh Brogan's book similarly points out the strength and weaknesses of Tocqueville's work so I feel vindicated in my youthful analysis. As a biographer, he is terrific. He has studied Tocqueville for much of his 40 years as a historian but waited to complete this work until he could access much of the Tocqueville archives that had been off-limits until recently. I felt he got inside Tocqueville, revealing his character, his times and feelings with amazing power. He also gave a sense of his many close relationships. I knew how he felt towards his tutor, his parents, best friends and wife. Sadly, he also gives a harrowing description of Tocqueville's last years of illness and the man's relationship to his sickness which was both complex and naive.
   
   I thought he was less successful in helping me understand Tocqueville's intellectual process. He talks about him being insightful but doesn't detail how those insights came about. I also think he could have put Tocqueville's work into intellectual historical context; how did he compare to other great thinkers of his era? What accounts for his ongoing influence when many others have faded away, have become important as indicative of their age or how they changed the way people thought about issues but aren't worth consulting for how we should think about our world today. That quality is what make Tocqueville so special.
   
   I have one other quibble. There is no discussion of why he and his wife didn't have children. Was it because of infertility? Choice? How did they feel about this? I have to believe that during this period and in the aristocratic class, not having children would be a big deal.