5 comments about Disturbing the Peace: The Story of Father Roy Bourgeois and the Movement to Close the School of Americas.

1. This book inspires and educates while still being a page-turner. Roy Bourgeois is a purple heart Vietnam veteran who became a Maryknoll missionary priest. He has been in and out of Latin American countries and in and out of prison as he fights for social justice. In his struggle he discovers the now infamous School of the Americas - Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation at Fort Benning, GA. This school has trained the hemisphere's worst human rights violators. This book skillfully weaves Fr. Roy's story with that of the School of the Americas leaving the reader uplifted by the courage of a man and a movement and appalled by the secret teaching of torture and anti-democracratic use of force. Great read!



2. The one thing that stands out the most about this book for me is that this priest was only standing for truth, freedom and justice. Yet the one country that he fought for during the Vietnam War prosecuted him for these beliefs. So much suffering in the world today is simply based on greed. One country trying to profit by controlling the government and natural resources of a smaller, weaker country.That is really what it is all about and the truth is there as long as we do not turn a blind eye as we did on Father Roy Bourgeois. Too many people today simply do as they are told and believe what they hear. You should read this book because the greatest threat facing the world is not knowing or ignoring the truth and sadly the world will continue to suffer at the hands of a few powerful people if we do not open our eyes.



3. Disturbing the Peace is a compelling story of a cleric who has dedicated his life to waging what some might call a quixotic battle against the highest military and political forces of the United States. These same forces look away from the evil they have wrought in other lands, specifically Latin America, and in American-run jails in Iraq.
   These evils, thanks to the machinations of the School of the Americas, include torture, murder, rape, and pillage. The school, costing Americans millions of dollars to maintain at Ft. Benning, Ga., is at the center of Bourgeois' relentless crusade. Bourgeois, who as a young man of the Louisiana bayoulands had beauteous Cajun mademoiselles at his beck and call and almost married one, chose the priesthood after heroic service and a Purple Heart in Vietnam. Following discharge, Bourgeois was appalled at America's foreign policy, which fawned upon megalomaniacal foreign dictators and which gave rise to the founding of the School of the Americas.
   This is no Bush-bashing book. Presidents of recent years have all contributed to the shameful institution that teaches young foreign soldiers how to commit the most nefarious crimes, then sends them back home to put into practice what they have been taught on American soil by American teachers.
   Item: Dismembering a 55-year-old woman with a chainsaw.
   Item: Torturing a priest before throwing him out of a high-flying helicopter.
   Item: Killing an archbishop, priests, and nuns in cold blood.
   Bourgeois and his followers have served time in jail and have had their lives threatened over their never-ending crusade to close down this inhumane cancer of the American military. Irony aside, the subject of this insightful, provocative biography is a modern Thomas Paine in clerical garb, indefatigably fighting for justice everywhere and against tranny in his own country.



4. Maryknoll Father Roy Bourgeois is a further example of the US repression of our religious expression.
   
   When Bob Dole went to Nicaragua for a Nixon-style Kitchen debate with freely and fairly elected Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega prior to the 1984 US elections, Dole accused the Nicaraguan government of religious repression. President Ortega, accompanied by hisministers of foreign relations and of education and of culture, Fathers Ernesto Cardenal, his Jesuit brother, and Maryknoll Father Miguel D'Escoto, pulled out a photograph of Father Roy Bourgeois being arrested and dragged away by US military forces at Fort Benning Georgia. This spelled the end of Bob Dole's presidential aspirations and political carreer, to be replaced with an interesting advertising endorsement.
   
   On the other hand the Reverend Father Roy has never wavered from his carreer and his commitment to preaching and to living the Gospel of Peace and Justice in Jesus Christ, with orthodoxy through orthopraxis, to the final consequences, running ever bravely in the footsteps of Our Lord. He remains strong in opposing those assassins of his own Maryknoll brothers and sisters like Bill Woods, and as on the cover here, Maryknoll Sister Ita Ford, killers and generals trained and directed from the SOA in terrorism, torture and homicide, who did not flinch from killing even the greatest prophet, martyr and saint of the Americas, Archbishop Oscar Arnulfo Romero.
   
   Father Roy finds his duty and obligation as Catholic, as priest, as true follower of Jesus Christ, to call to stop the killing and oppression, the torture and genocide. Father Roy never fails to stnad tall as a true prophet of Peace and of Jesus Christ. Let us learn by his holy example to do as well, for as long, in life-long commitment to peace, justice and the Gospel of Jesus Christ in its fullest daily, courageous expression.
   
   Read this book. Every Christian must read this book. All Americans must read this book. Each Catholic must embrace this book as lectio divina, as our own hagiography, as manual and rulebook of how to live as Catholics under this present military regime, courageously, integrally, standing up for peace and for Jesus Christ in our darkened and bloody day.
   
   Read this book before you judge him or stand with those who condemned Jesus Christ before the Sanhedrin. Father Roy is a great man, a great Catholic, an excellent priest, and a fine American, the kind we truly most need for our national moral and ethical recovery.
   
   Please read as well School of Assassins: The Case for Closing the School of the Americas and for Fundamentally Changing U.S. Foreign Policy, Ita Ford: Missionary Martyr, Witnesses to the Kingdom: The Martyrs of El Salvador and the Crucified Peoples, Rigoberta Menchu, Salvador Allende, General Noriega, ARENA in El Salvador, the contra, etc., etc., etc.



5. I began James Hodge's and Linda Cooper's "Disturbing the Peace" (2005, 244-page paperback) with high expectations. This chronicle of Father Roy Boureois' movement to close the US Military's "School of the Americas" promised to be a riveting narrative, in the genre of Oscar Romero, for advocacy and activism. As a Liberation Theology enthusiast (and advocate for the poor) myself, I relished the opportunity to learn from a colleague's experience. With the book's conclusion, however, only one word describes my encounter with this text- disappointing.
   
   The padre's odyssey to re-form government policy and actions is sometimes astonishing, often pedantic, and always interesting. For him, there is redemption and recognition in rebellion against his demons.
   
   Father Boureois is a product of his era's two extremes influences: his US Navy participation in the Viet Nam War and his Roman Catholic Liberation Theology religious training. These opposing, and sometimes polarizing, positions brought him to activism for the poor and oppressed. His story is brilliantly captivating, convincing, and converting! Perhaps, there is redemption in rebellion.
   
   The book is written with seventeen short chapters, fifteen pages of relevant black and white photos, but with only a brief six-page bibliography. It is disappointing that the text contains no footnotes or endnotes (causing it to earn fewer stars). Hodge and Cooper should remember that undocumented history is nothing more than novel fiction. Without retraceable source referencing one does not confidently believe presented material. Father Boureois' story deserves better.
   
   "Disturbing the Peace", as a quick read novel, is cautiously recommended to everyone interested in late 20th century American activism, anti-war advocacy, modern central and south American life, and Liberation Theology.

5 comments about Operation Solo: The FBI's Man in the Kremlin.

1. I am the son of the FBI agent Richard Hansen. I can attest to the secrecy of this operation by explaining how I learned about it. In 1997 I was looking through the new arrivals at my local library. I started leafing through this book and did a double take when I saw my dad's name. I checked out the book, rushed home, called my dad. Sure enough, he admitted that he was the agent in the book. It is an amazing testament to his fidelity that he did not speak of this operation(even after he retired), until this book came out.



2. This is an incredible story of a courageous couple of brothers and their wives who, while initially being drawn into Communism, were able to see the ugly truth behind it, and use their backgrounds to become the greatest spies in history. The book is written very well and as such it is hard to put down. Aside from a great story of intrigue, the book also offers a unique perspective on what really went on in the Kremlin as well as (parts of) the FBI.



3. The only thing more incredible than the story of Morris and Jack Childs, brothers who, from the early 1950s through the late 1970s, were FBI assets within the American Communist Party, and who were personal friends of Soviet leaders, is that Hollywood has yet to commit this to celluloid. Here were four brave Americans--to include their intrepid wives, Eva and Roz--who for decades risked their lives to report to the FBI (and from the Bureau to the President) on the thoughts and intentions of Soviet leaders. So trusted by their friends in the Soviet leadership, they served as secret Soviet emissaries to China and Cuba, reporting back to the Soviets the attitudes and positions of Mao and Castro. Thus successive U.S. presidents enjoyed unique intelligence on the thinking of not only the Soviets, but of the Chinese and the Cubans as well. The story told in OPERATION SOLO is spellbinding, frought with tension, occasionally leavened by the earthy humor of its principal players. This is, in short, a terrific story about great Americans--hardworking FBI agents who shied away from the spotlight, and their courageous assets--that demands to be read or, someday, seen on screen.
   
   A couple of points about John Barron's book. It is well written overall and reads quickly. It is not without faults, however. (1) The story is sometimes interrupted to introduce fairly extensive citations of reports written or passed along by the Childs. Without greater historical context, though, these passages are somewhat sterile and dry. Someday, one hopes, a more detailed study will add historical material external to SOLO that would, along with insightful analysis, demonstrate the true value of the SOLO reporting (as another reviewer here has suggested). (2) The section that deals with Martin Luther King is disappointing. For one thing, Barron is historically inaccurate or incomplete when the author states that "No one could have been more sympathetic to King than the Kennedy brothers." See Robert Dallek's excellent book on JFK for a better treatment of the Kennedys' complex relationship with King. Barron also downplays King's true significance as a great civil rights leader in order to discuss Communist ties to his inner circle of advisors. Furthermore, in an egregious departure from journalistic objectivity, Barron appears to excuse FBI's excessive campaign against King, including the infamous hotel wiretaps, on the pretext that King's private behavior was "inconsistent with [that] of a Christian minister and moral exemplar."
   
   These misgivings aside, this is a truly amazing tale. Read the book and then amaze your friends in recounting the story. Are you listening, Hollywood?



4. Barron's prose is articulate and well-phrased without wandering into pedantic posturing. We rarely know his opinion of all the goings-on, and what events he describes! We are quickly lost in this real world of espionage and deception, thoughtfully recreated by an author who knows his business and tells it well. An exciting read.



5. This is a compelling story of high stakes espionage in the Cold War. The amazing thing is that it is not fiction--it is history. The understanding that the author has about espionage and the intelligence community is right on. If you love history and are interested in the spy game--this is the book for you.

5 comments about Benito Mussolini: The First Fascist (Library of World Biography Series) (Library of World Biography).

1. How can such profound scholarship read like a novel. Best buy I've made in ages, and I buy much.



2. Short, solid introductory biography written with craftsman-like prose, which places Mussolini in historical context and is especially good at noting the political and cultural boundaries that limited his "totalitarianism."



3. the book is what it is advertized as--a weekend read of benito mussoilini. The author does a nice job of giving the reader a big picture view of the times and reasons for mussoilini's rise to power. I recommend the book to anyone who has never read any history of mussoilini--only heard of his death and being hung in the city square. It gives a nice reference point for conversations on WWII from Italy's perspective.



4. This book is brief but passionate and objective. The narrative flows easily and the reader is given a very good introduction to the Fascist era and its Duce. Highly recommended.



5. This was an excellent book for those wanting a concise and relatively short summary of Mussolini's life (1883-1945), nicely framed within the political events of the times. It objectively discusses his strengths and weaknesses, his supporters and foes, his rise to power and his inglorious decline and death. A quick read at 165 pages.

5 comments about Napoleon: A Biography.

1. Frank McLynn always does an excellent job regardless of what subject her approaches. This is truly a day by day account of Napoleon's life from childhood through his battles. Although I prefer Robert Asprey's two book biography of Napoleon McLynn does an excellent job of explaining Napoleons rise and fall. Do not be deterred by the length it goes very quickly and is a great start for someone who wants to learn about Napoleon.



2. As the title indicates, the book is "a biography" of Napoleon, one more to join the likely thousands written since his death and, like many, highly speculative in some respects. A welcome touch is that it adds considerably to our knowledge of Napoleon's formative years, childhood, stint at Brienne, and involvement with Paoli in Corsican affairs. The military campaigns are described thoroughly, almost hour by hour (I recommend a map nearby, or an Osprey book companion) and constitute the one aspect of the book that makes it outstanding. A great deal, however, is in the take-it-or-leave camp.
   
   I did not appreciate the attempts at psychoanalysis. Some "insights" are simply thrown in..."there were already indications of his bisexuality" (really? when? how?) or gleaned from the clearly speculative, at a great remove diagnoses of others - Jung, Freud, Adler, inter alia. They become annoying, as does his over-use of the term "Machiavellian", to the point of rendering it meaningless; I'd like to remind readers that in the shifting sands 1789-1795 France, that description would fit almost anyone who struggled to survive by cunning and calculation, as many did. He often describes Napoleon's attitude to women as misogyny, that is, one of hatred. At worst Napoleon disliked certain types of women and was cavalier in his treatment of others, something not untypical of men in general, but to call it "hatred" is going a too far. In that vein, the author's own attitudes are curious to say the least. Women like Josephine and Pauline, who used sex as a tool for survival and/or happened to like it become "nymphomaniacs" under his pen; women who aspired to an intellectual life, such as Germaine de Stael, are described as "pushy" and "pedant".
   
   Rather unforgivable (and astonishing in a serious writer) is the author's inclusion of certain malicious items of gossip with, incredibly, the addendum (also malicious) that there may have been a basis for it after all. So, as a glaring example, the English-sourced bit of calumny that Napoleon fathered Hortense's first child is given some credit by McLynn by the fact Napoleon grieved over the death of the boy. Napoleon loved Josephine's children as his own and it was perfectly natural that he would mourn the death of his first step-grandson (and nephew, since he was also Louis's son) I guess natural human responses are not allowed Napoleon!
   
   Annoyances apart, the book is good mainly, if not solely, for its excellent treatment of the military side of things.



3. I'm sure every biographer of Napoleon aspires to be the one to pin this man down once and for all, to figure him out and deliver him on a platter. Well, it does not happen with this book and even if the author claims that this was never the goal, the attempt is there. The result is a tome that might become increasingly tiresome to anyone who is already familiar with the subject and who does not already harbor a dedicated dislike for Napoleon, and too much for those trying to find a starting point. I would not recommend it to beginner students of Napoleon as it is heavily charged with the largelly negative personal biases and opinions of the author, lacks in specific maps - a necessity when covering a battle in great detail - and assumes the reader has a solid grasp of Europe in the 18th century, particularly France.
   
   McLynn, though calling him a "genius" at times, is hyper-critical of Napoleon as a man, son, husband, step-father and leader - at every stage of his career. His relationships with women are always "misogynistic". With the rest of society, institutions and other powers, invariably "machiavellian" - a word repeated ad nauseam, applicable or not. He is equally censorious of his mother, his wives, his lovers, his brothers, his sisters, his entourage, his friends, his assistants, his bourgeois nobility and his marshals. Did I leave anyone out?
   
   His marshals are singled out for scathing condemnation, marched in front of the firing squad of his pen one by one. Those like Masséna, Ney and Augereau who were "low born" are particular targets. Once riff-raff always riff-raff he seems to be saying.
   
   What made reading this book almost unbearable for me, in the end, are Mr.McLynn's psychoanalytic pretensions. He seems to rely heavily on Jung's speculative rumminations about Napoleon, coming up with novel and often ridiculous (as in "laughable") diagnoses of his own. Thus, Napoleon suffered from every personality disorder and crippling neurosis known to modern mental health professionals, and a few others yet to be discovered; enough for a full psychiatric conference, in fact! In their milder forms, his mental quirks are presented as "complexes". The "Rome complex" for example...Napoleon was interested in ancient Rome but indifferent to the Rome of his own time and, no Gibbon he, never went there. McLynn seriously writes that an "obsession" (another word he loves) with a city one doesn't intend to visit is a "complex". I personally have several then.
   
   His "Oriental complex" is the vague explanation for Napoleon's invasion of Egypt. Nothing about European powers keeping an eye on the crumbling Ottoman Empire and the generally held ambition to be the first to take Constantinople. Oddly, the planned invasion of England - which French strategists studied and prepared for long before Napoleon burst on the scene, and something he personally pursued on and off during his career - never rises to the status of an "England complex". But those familiar with complex-nomenclature in general will be happy to find "Oedipal complex" in there too. Of course.
   
   And so on. Annoying also are the puritanical judgments on the mores, or lack thereof, of 1789-1815 French society, which betray a poor ability to understand the period and refrain from veneering it with present values. It has also been observed that some biographies of Napoleon are essays on tyranny as understood by a post-Stalin or post-Hitler world. It's time Napoleon was allowed to return to his own time.



4. I saw a piece about Napolean on CBS Sunday Morning and I was very
   interested in learning more about him-this book contains all of the info
   you need.



5. I frankly couldn't finish the book, although I did read the beginning, his youth, and the end, and skimmed the middle. I was so put off by the psychobabble that pervades nearly every sentence of the biography of this man that I found it impossible to go on. It felt like being in a high school class just introduced to Freud, Jung et al. The author actually talks about Napoleon's short stature as an impetus to his need to succeed...the first sentence of the book I thought was tongue in cheek (to the effect of Napoleon was not a real person but a creation of the French nation's need for blood after the age of reason ---paraphrasing). But no...its all like that. His mother is powerful and controlling, his father is weak and emasculated...he hates his older brother and repressed it, therefore, the rest of Europe will suffer because he holds in what he would like to do to his older brother but cannot. And on and on. Does anyone still write and talk this way?

5 comments about Dwight D. Eisenhower.

1. There really could have been so much more said of this man, this General who led our troops during the Second World War, who entered politics in order to preserve the peace. In this short volume (the series is generally short and introductory in nature) the author, Tom Wicker, misses so many chances to engage his reader into discovering Dwight D. Eisenhower.
   
   Something I found especially difficult to ignore was the glaring omission of any mention (I believe there was but one fleating reference) of the Interstate Highway Act...something which arguably did more to change the face of American life and culture than any other measure of the time.
   
   Wicker does manage to capture a bit of character in discussing the 34th President of the United States. We are introduced to a man who served his country as both a military commander and as Commander-in Chief, who, following his first-hand experiences in war beleived that war should always be the option of last resort. Eisenhower's Farewell Address, warning his country against the dangers of an organized military complex, still is remarkable today.
   
   However, what Mr. Wicker does most successfully is present Eisenhower's failures. As president, Eisenhower was unwilling to spend political capital on divisive, politically-charged issues such as the growing tension of the Civil Rights struggle and the anti-communist witch hunts spurned by Senator Joseph McCarthy and HUAC (the House Un-American Activities Commitee). A more compelling figure might have stood up and directed his country through such difficult times; Eisenhower failed to act.
   
   Unfortunately, so does Wicker. The pages here feel as though the author slept through most of the writing. The book skims the surface of any real substantive discovery of what Wicker refers to as "the most popular president of modern times."



2. FIRST OF ALL, I TEACH HISTORY FOR A LIVING, SO I KNEW QUITE A BIT ABOUT THE SUBJECT MATTER BEFORE READING WICKER AND AMBROSE'S BOOKS. AFTER READING BOTH PIECES OF WORK, I CAN STILL DECLARE "I LIKE IKE." NO QUALITY, RELIABLE PIECE OF HISTORICAL WORK SHOULD HAVE A PERSONAL SLANT BY THE WRITER HIMSELF. IS THIS BOOK PERFECTLY WRITTEN? CERTAINLY NOT. IS IT WORTHY OF BEING READ; CERTAINLY. I HAVE TO ADMIT THOUGH, IT DOES HAVE A VERY NEGATIVE SLANT TOWARD IKE, ALMOST A PERSONALLY NEGATIVE SLANT.
   
   HOWEVER AFTER READING AMBROSE'S WORK ON IKE, YOU ALMOST FEEL AS IF IKE WAS THE SECOND COMING OF CHRIST. AMBROSE WHITEWASHED IKE'S FLAWS COMPLETELY. I THINK AMBROSE WAS ENAMORED WITH IKE. HELL, WHO WOULDN'T BE? THE MAN LED THE BIGGEST BUNCH OF HEADCASES (PATTON, MONTY, CLARK, MACARTHUR, AND DE GAULLE) IN WWII (OUTSIDE OF THE AXIS POWERS) TO VICTORY! IKE WAS A TREMENDOUSLY FLAWED INDIVIDUAL, BUT WHO ON EARTH ISN'T? I AGREE WITH THE OLD SAYING, "A MAN IS NEITHER GOOD NOR BAD FOR ONE ACTION." OR SEVERAL ACTIONS WITH IKE!
   
   I BELIEVE THAT MAYBE READING BOTH OF THESE GIVES YOU A BETTER PERSPECTIVE ON IKE RATHER THAN JUST PICKING ONE OVER THE OTHER. ONE PRESENTS IKE AS THE ANTI-CHRIST, AND THE OTHER PRESENTS IKE AS CHRIST REBORN. I'LL LET YOU DECIDE WHICH IS WHICH. IT WON'T TAKE YOU LONG.
   
   FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO THINK THAT THIS BOOK IS "TOO CRITICAL OF EISENHOWER", THE FACTS ARE WHAT THEY ARE! HE DID NOT INTEGRATE THE ARMED FORCES, TRUMAN DID. EISENHOWER DID HAVE AN AFFAIR WITH HIS BRITISH SECRETARY AND WAS TRYING TO LEAVE MAMIE, NO MATTER HOW AMBROSE TRIES TO DOWNPLAY IT. EISENHOWER WAS TREMENDOUSLY WEAK IN URGING CIVIL RIGHTS REFORM WHEN HE SPOKE TO SEVERAL KEY SOUTHERN SENATORS AND TOLD THEM THAT HE WAS ONLY SENDING IN FEDERAL TROOPS TO LITTLE ROCK BECAUSE HIS "OFFICE DEMANDED IT, BUT IT WAS GOING TO BE THE MILDEST OF CIVIL RIGHTS REFORM POSSIBLE." IF ANY PRESIDENT HAD THE PUBLIC SUPPORT TO BRING ABOUT RADICAL CIVIL RIGHTS REFORM, IT WAS IKE. HE WASTED THAT OPPORTUNITY COMPLETELY. IKE ALSO HUNG MARSHALL (A CLOSE PERSONAL "FRIEND" AND MENTOR) OUT TO DRY WHEN MCCARTHY BEGAN TO ACCUSE G.C. MARSHALL OF BEING A COMMIE IN THE EARLY 50'S. HE SOLD MARSHALL DOWN THE RIVER TO FURTHER HIS OWN POLITICAL CAREER. TRUMAN'S RELATIONSHIP WITH IKE DID NOT GO SOUTH BECAUSE AS AMBROSE CLAIMED, "IKE WAS A REPUBLICAN", IT WENT SOUTH BECAUSE IKE WAS EXTREMELY RUDE TO TRUMAN'S WIFE, BESS, ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS, AND BECAUSE TRUMAN BELIEVED IN LOYALTY TO YOUR FRIENDS (MARSHALL) NO MATTER HOW MUCH IT MIGHT HURT YOUR POLITICAL ASPIRATIONS. IF ONE REMEMBERS CORRECTLY, TRUMAN ACTUALLY APPOINTED A REPUBLICAN TO THE SUPREME COURT DURING HIS PRESIDENCY. SO THE "REPUBLICAN ARGUMENT" DOESN'T HOLD WATER AND IF AMBROSE HAD READ ANYTHING ON TRUMAN, HE WOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT. IKE ONLY DISTANCED HIMSELF FROM MCCARTHY WHEN IKE FELT MCCARTHY MAY ACTUALLY SAY SOMETHING NEGATIVE ABOUT IKE PERSONALLY, SINCE HE WAS THE FORMER HEAD OF THE ARMY THAT MACCARTHY WAS ACCUSING OF BEING LED BY REDS. BOTH BOOKS ARE FLAWED, AS WAS IKE THE MAN.



3. Wicker shows the complexities of our 34th President. Eisenhower was a great wartime commander. He led men into battle and exercised diplomacy in his wartime alliance. He was a so-so president who did some memorable things. Ike started the intrastate highway system, warned against the military-industrial complex, toppled two legitimate governments (Iran, Guatemala) and came close to a nuclear test ban treaty. He was a man many Americans treated as a father figure. He won two terms as President. Many people would have voted him a third term if the law allowed it. He was against the Brown vs. Board of Education decision but used the military to back up the judiciary.
   
   Wicker spent a week with Eisenhower in 1962. Even though his admiration of President and General Eisenhower in there, his book is a fair accessment of this great American. Eisenhower may not have been a great President, but he was far better than most of our chief executives.



4. As I write, our country is in the midst of a highly contentious presidential campaign, including, today, the sharply-fought Pennsylvania primary. In light of the furor of the ongoing campaign, I have been trying to revisit the American presidents in the short series of biographies edited by Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. I thought a consideration of our 34th President, Dwight D. Eisenhower would be especially appropriate for these tumultous events. I was alive during the Truman presidency but Eisenhower was the first president I can remember. I have always had the sense that he was, somehow, undervalued as a leader. Thus I was eager to read Tom Wicker's brief biography.
   
   Wicker admits at the outset that he was never a political supporter of Eisenhower. With that in mind, his admiration for Eisenhower as a person and for some of his accomplishments as President comes through in this book. I didn't find this book as harsh or unfair towards Eisenhower as did some of my fellow reviewers. Yet I agree that Eisenhower warrants a more detailed look than Wicker's and, indeed, deserves more.
   
   Eisenhower (1890 -- 1969) was born in Texas but grew up in Kansas. He served two terms as the 34th president (1953 -- 1961). Wicker's book, probably for reasons of space, quickly passes over Eisenhower's early life, including his extraordinary military career, to focus on the eight years of his presidency.
   
   The 1950s were a difficult time in which the United States and the U.S.S.R came perilously close to war on several occasions. Wicker offers Eisenhower qualified praise for his foreign policy and for his role as a "man of peace." Eisenhower ended the war in Korea and worked for disarmament even though, in Wicker's terms he "fumbled" on opportunity to secure a nuclear test-ban treaty late in his administration as a result of his decision to authorize a final U-2 flight over Russia. Wicker gives Eisenhower high praise for his handling of the Suez Crisis in 1956, which he describes as the President's finest hour, and for his calming influence after the U.S.S.R launched Sputnik in 1957, leading to panic among many Americans over our educational system and scientific and military readiness. Wicker faults Eisenhower for his engagin in covert warfare in Guatamala and Iran and he is vaguely critical of Eisenhower's role in precipitating what would become America's involvement in Vietnam.
   
   In domestic affairs, Wicker focuses almost entirely of Eisenhower's role in discrediting Senator Joseph McCarthy and in his actions regarding Civil Rights. Many writers besides Wicker are critical of Eisenhower for not being more agressive against McCarthy. But as Wicker shows, Eisenhower worked effectively to bring about McCarthy's demise, not the least of which work was in allowing him to self-destruct. Eisenhower's approach may well have been more effective and less divisive to the country than a more confrontational approach.
   
   Wicker also is highly critical of Eisenhower for his less than full support of the Supreme Court's decision in Brown v. Board of Education and for his failure to exercise the moral suasion both he and his office possessed to implement civil rights. Many admirers of Eisenhower have come to the same conclusion. Yet, Eisenhower used force to protect the rights of African American students in Little Rock, Arkansas in 1957. And Eisenhower's two immediate successors in the presidency were themselves slow to commit to the civil rights movement. A recent book by David Nichols, "A Matter of Justice: Eisenhower and the Civil Rights Revolution" (2007) reassess in part Eisenhower's contributions behind the scenes to the cause of civil rights.
   
   The 1950s are sometimes regarded as a time of somnolescence and conformity in the United States and sometimes as a subject of sentimentalized nostalgia. Eisenhower had proven his ability as a leader during WW II and he served the nation well, even Wicker admits, as President during a difficult era. According to one of his advisers quoted by Wicker, Eisenhower's greatest strength was "in getting people to compromise divergent views without anyone's surrender of principle." (p. 138) In view of the never-ending tumult our country has undergone since the 1960s, one can do worse than the balance, sanity, and quietly effective leadership that characterized the presidency of Dwight D. Eisenhower.
   
   Robin Friedman



5. "I like Ike." A statement that defined the political world of the 1950s. The popular leader of Allied forces in the European Theater during World War II received high approval ratings from the public throughout his presidency. This brief book, a part of The American Presidents series, provides a brief and readable glimpse of Ike's life and his presidency. The author is Tom Wicker, who originally achieved considerable visibility as a columnist with The New York Times.
   
   If you're like me, you might rather read D'Este's "Eisenhower," which takes almost 700 pages to text to bring his biography to the end of World War II. However, most people will not be interested in such a massive work, and the 140 page volume by Wicker is apt to prove more attractive to people.
   
   As with other volumes in the series, this one begins with the family background and Dwight Eisenhower's early years. Some readers might be surprised to know that, when he went to West Point, he was a star football player (and see the incredible confrontation between Ike and his mates and Jim Thorpe and his in books such as 'Carlisle vs. Army"). Later, he began to work his way up the military hierarchy, by providing excellent staff support to leaders such as Generals Pershing, MacArthur and Marshall. When World War II broke out, he was not an especially visible figure. Soon, though, he rose to Allied command in North Africa and then in Europe. Other books describe this period in much more detail--and illustrate both his strengths and his weaknesses. After the War, he served in a number of capacities. In 1952, he began his quest for the presidency.
   
   The book does a nice job of showing how he won the nomination. Then, his major challenges: the War in Korea, Quemoy and Matsu, the U-2 shoot down, Dienbienphu and Vietnam, Senator McCarthy, economic slowdowns, physical ailments (heart attack and stroke), the space race, relations with the Soviet Union, and so on and so on. Once thought of as a rather amiable cipher as president, historians and political scientists more recently have reappraised his presidency. I am not sure that that reappraisal always manifests itself in Wicker's book.
   
   Then, the transition as of the election of 1960. The relationship between Eisenhower and Nixon is played out reasonably well in this book. Then, after the e3lection, Eisenhower's retirement from public service and his later years.
   
   As a brief biography, this works pretty well. For those wanting to get a sense of Dwight Eisenhower in a compact book, this is pretty good.

5 comments about True Myths of Arnold Schwarzenegger: The Life and Times of Arnold Schwarzenegger, from Pumping Iron to Governor of California.

1. I used to think Schwarzenegger was great... now I'm not so sure!!

   This book makes you realise that he is just one big marketing ploy. You also get to see that he is not a nice person - he tramples over people to get what he wants, and makes you realise that most of the charity work he does is only to make him look like a good person...

   I think this quote from the book sums him up, "I admire people like hitler..."

   EEK. Will change the way you see him drastically. I preferred my blind opinion of him before!!




2. Great Book. Takes an honest look at the real life "Arnold Schwarzenegger". It may take the magic out of the man for some , but it puts a human face on one of the greatest personalities of our times. The book points out that, like all of us, Arnold has his imperfections, but through sheer will and a fanatical determination to succeed, he pulled himself up by his boot straps and propelled himself to success. An absolute "MUST READ" for all true Arnold fans.



3. This author is out to make Arnold look bad, not to sure about this book...I think its a bunch of BS myself. Arnold is a true Idol, a star, a person someone wants to be. This guy makes Arnold out to be a pure bonified *%*$*@*...I do not believe the bullcrap from this book at all...



4. Although the book is not that flattering for Arnold its not that bad either. I stopped following his career in the early 90's and it has alot of information about him since then. Most of the information about his career early on and into the 80's I already knew but had more detail than in previous material I had read.



5. This my may not be the best book you will ever read, but if you're interested in information about Arnold, this is not a bad choice. The author mentions all the obstacles he had in writing this book and does not try to make it seem like it is an authorized biography in any way. He does give you a look at Arnold without the childish self-promoting efforts that Arnold's autobiography seems to try. This is a fun book, with a slight edge to it like you're reading something that might have been printed in a tabloid were it not printed in a book. You can almost feel like you are sneeking around with the author trying to find out information about Arnold that is not some sort of publicity stunt. It might not be the most fair look at Arnold, but then again neither is Arnold's autobiography. I think the real story might be found somewhere in between the two books.

4 comments about Die Nigger Die!: A Political Autobiography of Jamil Abdullah al-Amin.

1. While rightfully cited as an articulation of Black anger in the 60s, there are portions of this book that are difficult to take seriously. Rap/El-Amin's hilarious descriptions of pilfering items in Lyndon Johnson's White House, the story of his being stopped by the Louisiana cops for wearing ragged clothes, his refusal to eat or drink anything in prison for 43 DAYS (last time I checked in biology class, no human could go that long without water) etc. come off like wild tall tales told by one of Richard Pryor's characters. Even when the book is serious, there is never a dull moment. His observations on Ebony magazine, poor whites, and the explaination of the book's title, will make you laugh as well as think. Oh yeah, check out his "Rap" early on in the book, the contents of which would make NWA blush!

   The recent noteriety of Rap/El-Amin adds a somber note to the proceedings, but in the meantime, read this. You can see why this wild, controversial, and colorful book was so popular in the late 1960s. A cross between Richard Pryor and Malcolm X! Certainly one of the most entertaining of the Black Power manifestos.




2. H. Rap Brown has been called the african-american Jim Goad. In Mr. Brown's case, however, his screed is directed not at women and liberals but instead at "honkeys," "crackers" and, of course, "THE MAN!" This autobiography gives the reader insight into the anger that fueled one man's efforts to bring down "the system." Overall, though, the book is kinda insubstantial and considering the darn thing cost nearly 15 bones, there are much better books on the subject.



3. When H.Rap Brown's classic autobiography was first published, he was former chair of SNCC, the leading Black liberation group in the United States. Back then, I used this book as an introduction to the Black Power movement. Rap Brown was a grassroots leader, and he spoke the language of the grassroots community. In my estimate, H. Rap Brown was one of the most successful political agitators of the black revolt. With the exception of Malcolm X, there were few that could match his effectiveness of moving people in the streets. For that precise reason, Brown, now Imam Jamil Al-Amin, has been a key victim of repression, for fighting for black liberation.



4. This is the autobiography of the type of man who has long gone out of style in the black community--an original man. While down-to-earth in manner, H. Rap Brown had a understated intelligence that served him well. But it's his ability to translate thoughts into words that make this book worth reading. From issues like skin color to class divisions, Brown outlines many issues that still face the black community today.
   
   A lot of political works get caught in the trap of trying to reflect the intelligence of the writer, Brown does the best job of effectively communicating from the black street perspective.
   I'm sure he would like for everyone who reads this to read his Revolution by the Book, and when you compare the two you can chart the evolution of an original man, from street scholar to religious cleric. Read it for yourself and make up your own mind.

5 comments about Born Again (Colson, Charles).

1. Colson's version of what happened during Watergate is a self-serving, sanctimonious whitewash of what he did and what he was responsible for. As the self-syled " Go-to guy" when something needed to be done. As Howard Hunt's boss, it defies belief that he was ignorant of what went on. He managed to get away without any responsibility for what he was surely guilty of and plead guilty to a crime of his choosing, which he hoped not to serve any time for.Surely to be "Born Again" he needs to tell the whole truth rather than this sanitized version.



2. . . . as readers of my reviews have probably figured out. I have been familiar with this book for many years, but only recently have I taken the time to sit down and read it through.
   
   "Born Again" is an honest and forthright admission of sinfulness and forgiveness, tracing Mr. Colson's path through Watergate and prison to the freedom in Christ he now enjoys.
   
   To the best of my recollection, this is the first book to be published by one of the "Watergate figures". Magruder's book came out shortly afterward, and Haldeman wrote two (contradictory) books on the subject. I wonder if the Charles Colson of 2005 would view the events of 1972-1974 as the Charles Colson of 1976 did. I wonder if he would have made some of the same choices now as he did as a brand-new Christian (with a great deal of guilt on his conscience).
   
   Regardless, both as an "insider's account" of the Nixon White House, and as a testimony of how Christ can change a life, "Born Again" is definitely worth a read.



3. "Born Again" is the story of Chuck Colson's life from the Nixon presidency to his release from the Maxwell AFB prison facility with some comments on his early life.
   
   The first 250 or so pages deal with his time serving Nixon and of the circumstances that led to his accepting Jesus Christ as his personal Savior and Lord. The book's last 100 pages or so deal with his relationships with other prisoners in the Maxwell facility.
   
   Indeed, some skeptics question whether Colson had a true conversion and is using the book to promote himself. If so, then why does Colson mention a positive change in relationships with his political enemies after becoming a Christian? Indeed, one of his strongest supporters (Harold Hughes) was a Democratic senator from Iowa (Colson was a Republican). Oh well!
   
   The book flows freely and is intensely interesting. "Born Again" reflects the popularity and enjoyable reading of other Colson books. Whether you are a Republican or Democrat (sorry political junkies, God is neither!), a Colson supporter or hater, a Nixon supporter or hater, you will enjoy Colson's "Born Again".
   
   Colson's prison experience was not wasted. God used this time to burden Colson with the need to minister to prisoners today through the worldwide Prison Fellowship ministry. Yet again, God can take something good out of something bad.
   
   Read and enjoy the book and be challenged to realize that despite your background, God can work great and mighty things through a person who is surrendered to Him!
   
   Highly recommended.



4. Charles Colson resembles the adulterous minister in the Scarlet Letter. Before his parishioners, Arthur Dimmesdale confesses error freely but gives no specifics. Colson too confesses overweening pride, but gives no, or few, specifics. And where he gives specifics, he confesses no error. He denies involvement in Watergate but acknowledges defaming Daniel Ellsberg, an action that he alleges is no crime. In fact, he says he had to convince the judge to allow him to plead guilty to obstruction of justice in connection with the Ellsberg matter even though technically he broke no law. Colson did nothing, saw nothing, said nothing. He is a great sinner in the abstract but not in the concrete.
   
   His conversion seems to be genuine but limited. He went from being the grandest political operative to being the grandest sinner. After he found Christ, rather than going home, falling to his knees, opening his heart, and closing his mouth, he went to White House prayer breakfasts and discussed his conversion on "60 Minutes." He surrendered all but the spotlight.
   
   An interesting autobiography still. The portion in which he writes about his prison experience sounds authentic.



5. There are a lot of lessons to be learned from Born Again, and Colson shares them as opposed to teaching them, with the fresh, excited style of new convert so that the reader if he is a crusty old saint (like me) is carried back to the days of his first love.
   
   The book is part political insight, part Wartergate/Nixon history, but mostly testimony, and the testimony of God dealing with and finally saving someone who wasn't particularly looking or particularly worthy or even, in spite of prison coming on, particularly desperate. The issue and focus of the book is on God dealing with man, and the backdrop is Watergate and prison which makes it interesting to a broad spectrum, but the focus is always on the gift of the cross. Colson is a decent, in fact, pretty good writer, and unlike many Watergate figures apparently did his own writing. It still flows, but flows within a framework of authenticity as opposed to slick ghost-writing. I've read a few other of his books, but this is the cornerstone, and it is probably worth reading even to the secular because it was such a pivotal story. Not many testimonies become movies, even Billy Graham movies, and that sort of underlines the significance. Probably to the late 70s and early 80s what Cross and the Switchblade was to the earlier Jesus Freak era. I really enjoyed this book, it both informs and inspires. Critics looking for some disavowal of everything America and conservatism stands for will be disappointed, but again, that's not what the book is about- the politics are merely a vehicle for the story of redemption, and it is spiritual and not political redemption.

5 comments about George Mason, Forgotten Founder.

1. George Mason was an important figure, seemingly coming out of nowhere, just before and during the Revolution and up to the formulation of the Constitution. He is one of the lesser known founders, probably as much known for being one of the few who refused to sign the Constitution (along with such figures as Luther Martin and Elbridge Gerry).
   
   One key aspect of Mason's personality (page 19): ". . .Mason possessed an incisive intellect and a commanding personality, but he was not inclined to suffer fools gladly or to compromise his own opinions. Given his nature, the mystery may not be why Mason initially showed little interest in the day-to-day business of government, but why he sought public office at all."
   
   This book focuses on his consuming passion for business, including his tenacious effort to make the Ohio Company work. This land company intended to take land and develop it for the profit of the owners. It was a constant struggle and never panned out as desired. His political views had some quirky elements for the time, including a condemnation of slavery (although phrased in the context of the times), although he himself owned slaves.
   
   Given his reputation as one of the leaders in the runup to the Revolution and through the Consitutional Convention, it is odd to see that he was not involved in politics in a major way until middle age. Yet, from 1774 to the Revolution, he bacame one of the major writers of Revolutionary tracts, laying out a critique of England and a case for freedom. While his relations with George Washington were sometimes frosty, he apparently worked well with other leading Virginians, such as Patrick Henry, Thomas Jefferson, James Monroe, James Madison, and Richard Henry Lee.
   
   After the Constitution was ratified, with Mason arguing against this document, his health began to decline, until he died in 1792. He grew disenchanted with the national government and disagreed with many of its policies after Washington became president. However, he appears to have remained on good terms with some officials, such as John Marshall and James Monroe. While he remained mildly active in local politics from 1789 until his death, he refused an appointment to the United States Senate.
   
   In the end, Mason (page 251) "helped to make a respectable revolution." His legacy (page 251): ". . .his contribution to America's founding documents: the Declaration of Independence through the Virginia Declaration of Rights through his dogged opposition to a Constitution without one."
   
   The book is not particularly elegantly written, but the style is serviceable. There is enough depth to the biography that the reader gains a pretty good picture of Mason, his life, his times, and his role in history. For those interested in the Founding generation and its major actors, this book would be a useful addition to one's library.



2. I struggled for a long time to try and force myself to read this book. I finally gave up and donated it to our public library. It was boring beyond belief. Only 1 of our 7 member book club finished it, and he didn't like it either!



3. I was actively looking forward to a book about George Mason, whose home is a landmark I visited 40-50 years ago, and whose name in my area adorns a major street and a university. Who was he? This book helps explain that. An amazing tale, really, of a gent who had a surprising lot to do with the birth of our nation and its constitution, yet is relatively little known. (Author Broadwater notwithstanding, it's no mystery why Mason has been neglected; he may have been an influential, clear, brilliant, and nonpartisan thinker but he didn't support the Constitution and in general, shunned the limelight.)
   
   The book is not just a biography, but a deep-reaching regional history. It tells a lot about the economic and social issues of the "American colonies" in the 18th century. Many of us overlook that, in the turmoil of creating a nation, there were a lot of ongoing matters of concern, such as the future of the lands to the west. Mason's careful husbanding of his economic and commercial interests augurs the role that commercialism has played ever since in the formation of our country. Finally, Mason's role in creating our Bill of Rights and some of the key elements of the U.S. Constitution cannot be overlooked, but his view that the inevitable tendency of "rulers" to augment their power leads just as inevitably to tyranny remains well worth keeping in mind today.
   
   The writing is a bit turgid, and if you're not much interested in the finer points of constitutional law or legislation, this will likely be a boring book. The author's annoying reliance on "if" clauses, (about one per paragraph) rather than the simple "but", doesn't help.



4. George Mason, truly an ignored Founder of whom Thomas Jefferson said was "one of our really great men", is treated in a fair and easy to read biography penned by Jeff Broadwater.
   
   The book follows his political career touching upon the many important bills and concepts he introduced into the Revolutionary era Virginia Legislature. The book does a fine job shining a light upon what a key figure to our founding that Mason was.
   
   In many ways, however, one gets a negative view of the man over his constant shirking of duty -- he too often arrived late or not at all to legislative sessions -- and his constant complaining over his health. Granted, if one knows much about the Founders and their era, health seems to be one thing they all constantly whined about. After all, men rarely lived past the late 30s in those days, so any pain or discomfort was feared to be death come a' knocking.
   
   In any case, it was interesting to see the turmoil and difficulty that the state of Virginia had funding and supplying troops to the war effort. With history settled, it is always too easy to feel that the country was united with a single mind and all for the spilt with England as well as ready to sacrifice their last strengths to that effort. Reality, though, is a far different thing than the rose-colored glasses of popular sentiment.
   
   One thing seemed missing from this book, as important as is the information contained within. Mason's voice does not come through in Broadwater's work. We never get as much of a feel for the man as we do for his end work and the times in which he lived.
   
   It's a shame that Broadwater didn't give us more of Mason's own quotes so that we might see what his contemporaries saw in his applauded rhetoric. Perhaps not enough of his own words survive to have attempted that treatment and maybe Broadwater really only had Mason's legislative work from which to glean "the" man, but I still felt the book seemed somewhat detached from the man himself.
   
   In any case, I recommend the book to those who are interested in a Founder who has missed out on the lionizing so many of his fellows have received.



5. I felt this was a good book about a secondary figure in the revolutionary period. Mason was important because he was close to leaders like Washington, Madison and Patrick Henry. He was also a leading figure in his beloved state of Virginia and since Virginia was so influential Mason's contributions should not be overlooked. Mason was a firm believer in the union but he feared a strong central government and the threat it could pose to individual liberty. Thus he was a leading anti-federalist who attended the constitutional convention but was one of the leaders against ratification. This book yields important insights into the battle between federalists and their opponents in Virginia and shows how this split among leaders of the early republic foreshadowed much that was to come including the whole states rights controversy. Well worth reading.

3 comments about . . . And His Lovely Wife: A Campaign Memoir from the Woman Beside the Man.

1. Connie Schultz takes us inside her husband's 2006 senatorial campaign and shows us, in a warm,
   conversational style, just what it takes for the candidate--and the family--to win a statewide office. She is real,
   down-to-earth, funny and tells it like it is. Her passion for helping people matches her husband's, and she
   puts her heart and soul into the election. A book for all political junkies of any party!



2. Connie Schultz has written a love story and a fun quick read! This couple had their priorities straight as they struggled--and triumphed--through the inevitable challenges of the American political campaign. I appreciated Ms. Schultz calling herself a feminist (without apologizing for keeping her name) and Sherrod Brown accepting the label of liberal--it was refreshing to peek into the lives of people true to their roots and their beliefs. And it makes me think about what Michelle Obama must be experiencing right about now...



3. After a long presidential primary season, with the general election still to come, I'd decided I wanted no more of politics. The role of money, negative campaigning, and media coverage of (as far as I was concerned) non-issues, and an e-mail in-box filled with reports of the latest outrage committed by whichever candidate the sender opposed had turned me off the whole process.
   
   Then I read Connie Schultz's ...And His Lovely Wife: A Memoir from the Woman Beside the Man, an account of the year spent with her husband, Sherrod Brown, in his 2006 campaign for the United States Senate, and my cynicism disappeared.
   
   Schultz, a Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist for the Cleveland Plain Dealer, had been married to Brown, a U. S. Representative from Ohio, for just over two years when Brown told her he wanted to run for the Senate against a popular incumbent. They agreed that he would run as an "unapologetic progressive"; that he would run a statewide campaign and would fight back against any attack ads; and that their marriage would remain a priority.
   
   But the day after taking leave from her job, less than two months into the campaign, Schultz wrote in her journal, "WHAT'S TO BECOME OF ME?" She knew that her career, her marriage, and her very identity as a writer and as a feminist would be threatened--that as the spouse of a candidate, she would go from "being a woman paid to give her opinion to a wife spouting her husband's views everywhere she went." That she shared most of Brown's views was little consolation when she was repeatedly introduced on the campaign circuit as "his lovely wife."
   
   Schultz discovered, however, that she could "write [her] own playbook."
   
   "I didn't have to follow someone else's rules on how to be a political wife. In fact, I could just keep on being Sherrod's wife and do what I have always done: talk to people, take notes, and share their stories--and my own...The road up ahead offered a lighted path I couldn't see when I was way back there, wallowing in all that fear."
   
   The author takes the reader behind the scenes of a campaign in an uphill race for national office: the intense (and necessary) fundraising efforts, the hectic schedules, the friendships begun and those threatened, and the challenges of dealing with the press (the Plain Dealer endorsed Brown's opponent). Especially interesting is her discussion of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) and the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) in affording financial backing to their respective candidates. In a chapter entitled "Karl Rove's Blunder," she details a turning point, the DSCC's funding of a response to an attack ad--one which used a "doctored version" of the burning Twin Towers--run on television by Brown's opponent at the urging of Karl Rove. "Long before a single vote had been counted," she writes, "we'd already won."
   
   Far from being just "his lovely wife," Schultz was an integral part of her husband's campaign. She not only served as his fashion coordinator (which included telling the director of his TV commercials that Brown didn't have a "power suit"), monitored his health, and appeared with him at campaign events. But she always spoke for him in her own voice. For me, the most moving part of the book comes when she is once more introduced as "'Sherrod Brown's wife...one of those women who won't change her name...'" (Confession: I, too, retained my name upon marrying; nevertheless, when I came across Sherrod Brown's name the first time, I flipped back to the cover to note with surprise that Connie Schultz hadn't changed her name!) In the speech following that introduction, Schultz explained that she has kept the name given to her by her father, a blue-collar worker, and that "one of the reasons I fell in love with Sherrod Brown was because he has spent his entire career fighting for the people I come from."
   
   Following Brown's election to the Senate, Schultz returned to her position as columnist at the Plain Dealer, where she continues to express her own opinion, to the dismay of some readers. In response to an e-mail insisting that, as the wife of an elected official, she has no business writing a newspaper column, she replied that marriage "does not suck the brain out of a woman or render her incapable of an independent thought." This statement alone might indicate why Schultz was an asset to the campaign.
   
   ...And His Lovely Wife is instructive, touching, funny, and inspiring. Calling herself "everywife," Schultz says that "[u]timately, this is a story about a marriage" that is tested and changed by eleven months of public scrutiny. It is also a story of a political campaign run by positive people in a positive way--an excellent book to read during a long campaign season.
   
   by Kathy Waller
   for Story Circle Book Reviews
   reviewing books by, for, and about women