5 comments about Complete Idiot's Guide to the American Presidents.

1. I bought this for my son's school report on presidents and got hooked myself. This is a fantastic book. Filled with all the facts and information you need to know, but fun to read. Don't take the Idiot's title literally. This is for anyone who wants or needs to know anything there is to know about our greatest, worst, and most mediocre presidents.



2. This is a very interesting book if you're wanting an overview of Presidential History. It covers the highlights of each president, but of course in about 400 pages, it's simply impossible to go very deep.

   The book is arranged, not in chronological order, but in descending order of each president's success in office, as judged by the author, of course. I probably would have preferred a chronological discussion, for the simple reason that it would be easier to view each biographical sketch in it's larger context.

   But again, overall it's a good read. I'd suggest it for anyone who is interested in American Presidential History but doesn't want to read multiple books to get the overview he wants.




3. The problem with this book is that if one is not somewhat familiar with U.S. history, there will no framework on which to hang the few actions and events that occurred on each president's watch. And the organization of the book contributes to that problem, because the presidents are not presented chronologically. The continuity of events across presidencies gets lost in this book.

   The presidents are discussed in five tiers, from the "undisputed champions" to the "tomoto cans." In other words, they are ranked from the best to the worst. After the top tier, there is definitely room to quibble with the ratings. The author is rather vague as to the selection process. As a side note, for this reader what is especially noticeable in this journey through the presidents is the remarkably few really top notch presidents we have had. Most have been rather mediocre.

   Contributing to the narrative disorganization of the book is the author's scattering of snippets of presidential facts in boxes on each page that are not necessarily connected to the main text. In addition, despite the modest amount of information that is actually presented in the book, there are several errors in facts and dates and in some cases there is an absence of dates.

   For a quick read that will yield a few basic facts, this book will serve that purpose. Beyond that, the book's utility is doubtful.




4. This is an excellent source for information about the men who have served as Chief-Executive. Some of it is obscure, hence, it makes the subject matter entertaining.



5. The only reason I didn't give this book 5 stars is because the presidents are not listed chronilogically. They are grouped together as "Legends" or "Heavyweights" etc. It was sometimes difficult to remember what tariff did what or what law hurt who's presidency if it's not listed in order and you keep having to go back and check. If you can get around that timeline thing than this book is very good for giving great info.

1 comments about Winston Churchill - The Photobiography.

1. Plenty of biographies have been written about Churchill's life: so why the need for yet another? Just take a look at Michael Pateson's unique Winston Churchill: Personal Accounts Of The Great Leader At War to see the difference. For one thing, comments Churchill made about himself have been paired with previously unpublished, firsthand accounts of those who knew him to provide plenty of detail on Churchill's military background and how it changed his life and perceptions. Paterson adds the recollections of Churchill's superiors, fellow officers, and more to provide fresh material which is not covered in other books. Secondly, Winston Churchill follows a chronological order focusing on his military campaigns, which provides the ability to appreciate the changes in Churchill's strategic thinking over the decades. Finally, Winston Churchill provides plenty of technical references for further study, making it one of the most detailed biographies about Churchill in print. Very highly recommended.

4 comments about FDR and Lucy: Lovers and Friends.

1. I was expecting a thorough examination of the love affair between FDR and Lucy Mercer. The affair has been common knowledge for forty years and it's always touched upon in Roosevelt biographies and documentaries. But this book is a rather crushing disappointment, padded with much unnecessary and repetitive information. Most of the book consists of boring material relating directly to Lucy's life as Mrs. Rutherford in the 20's and 30's. Personally, I was expecting more details on FDR's affair with her throughout WWI, Eleanor's discovery of her love letters in Franklin's suitcase, and then the hysterical control-monster, Sarah Delano Roosevelt, demanding Franklin dump Lucy or risk losing his inheritance. Now that is the stuff of legend!
   
   Instead we get a dreary narrative with no new information. The book picks up a bit when Lucy re-enters Roosevelt's life in the 30's and spends considerable time with his in the closing years of his life. Most of their meetings took place in Warm Springs, Georgia, and also in the White House. FDR's daughter, Anna, was the one who invited Lucy to the Executive Mansion while Eleanor was away on one of many tours during the war. It's mindful to recall a remark from Alive Roosevelt Longworth in this context: "Franklin deserves a good time. He was married to Eleanor!"
   
   If you know little about the mechanics of the Lucy-Franklin alliance, this is a well-written and entertaining book. But if you know more about the pair, it wouldn't be particularly revealing. The characterization of Eleanor is especially weak. While I'm not advocating adultery, let's face facts: Eleanor was frigid, disinterested in sex and in the 30's took up close "friendships" with people like Lorena Hickock (who makes Yogi Berra look gorgeous in comparison). I really can't blame a man as charming and handsome as Franklin Roosevelt pursuing sex outside of marriage. His choice may not have been the "moral" one (whatever that means), but it was the only logical thing to do under the circumstances.
   
   To sum up, if you're an FDR newbie, this would be nice. If you're not, forget it.



2. Resa Willis tells the story of a time in American history as skillfully, objectively, personally, accurately and compassionately as humanely possible in 152 pages. How refreshing!
   
   You are privileged to hear about all the FDR doings and Eleanor Roosevelt doings along with all the important players.
   
   And, you come to learn how a great man so deeply loved by so many women could be fundamentally lonely.
   
   Some would call it Eleanor's sweet revenge.



3. When I first started graduate school in history, I used to speculate as to how there could be another biography of Lincoln or Washington, or who ever without some newly discovered source of information. I came to learn that historians reevalute existing sources in light of new events and/or place their own unique perspecitve on the materials.
   
   In the case of Resa Willis' FDR AND LUCY, Willis did none of the above. When a new book comes out on a subject in which one has interest, there is always hope that there is some new sources or new perspective. While doing a fine job of research and writing, Willis adds nothing new to a story that came to light in the 1960's after the death of Eleanor.
   
   Willis quotes children and friends of FDR and Lucy Mercer but as another reviewer said - there's nothing new. The story is stretched a bit with the inclusion of lots of basic facts about American history. There is a decent amount of information about the geneology of some of the characters, but other than showing the Mercer and FDR lived in a relatively close circle of friends and relatives, its old hat. She offers some speculation. Did FDR have an hand in arranging the marriage of Lucy and her husband Wintrop Rutherfurd. But she offers no anwers. She talks about FDR's circle of women friends but the author draws no conclusions about these relationships or how they reflected on FDR's personality.
   
   One of the amazing things about the relationship between FDR and Lucy is that the servants never talked. In the 21st century, all of the servants and secret service agents would have published tell all books. As an African American, whose family lived in Aiken, I always found it amazing that no one in the African American community, who clearly would have served as servants, ever mentioned a visit from the President. I've looked for the railroad siding that was suppose to have been built to accomodate the President but have never figure out where it was.
   
   Willis takes no sides in relating her story. She relates the story of two people who had an affair and the came to be great friends. She provides an insight in to life at the White House during the War years but there is little character development.
   
   If you know nothing about FDR and Lucy Mercer, read the book. If you know the least little bit from previous readings, don't bother.



4. Unlike many other traditional biographies, "FDR and Lucy" is a fast read that gives its readers a true overview of FDR's long-term relationship with Mrs. Lucy Rutherfurd. "FDR and Lucy" is a very focused account of someone who was clearly close to Franklin's heart and does not lead the reader astray with too much coverage of the historical events happening at the time.

1 comments about FDR: Nothing to Fear.

1. This is a great book. FDR may be a favorite of yours or not, regardless his speeches desereve to be read. FDR was an inspirational speaker who moved the masses with his words. He has left us with many timeless and priceless quotes that can be found in the speeches featured in this book. I would highly recommend this book to any one looking for a boost in confidence. FDR's words make you feel like anything is possible. Remember "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself".

5 comments about The Lion's Pride: Theodore Roosevelt and His Family in Peace and War.

1. This book made me want to be a better, more involved citizen. It really gets at the heart of this incredible family.



2. I read any book on TR. This one I was hoping would reveal more about his family. It still is a good read about TR.



3. Renehan's accounting of the last years of Theodore Roosevelt Jr. is condensed and fascinating. Mostly covering 1898 and 1910-1919, the book provides insight into the southern New York high society of the early 20th century. Famous names, including Vanderbilt, Roosevelt, Cowles, and Coolidge, parade across the pages.
   
   Nuggets include the mention of Harvard in that time as a conservative and pro-military bastion (compared to today's institution fighting military recruitment in court), Woodrow Wilson viewed as an appeaser, a coward, and an appointer of bigots in his administration (in contrast to a reputation as being a visionary negotiator), observation by Gen. George Patton that Theodore's eldest son, Brig. Gen. Theodore Roosevelt III, was a courageous commander- but no soldier (both father and son won the Medal of Honor...a feat perhaps not matched by any other American family), and the contrast highlighted between Kaiser Wilhelm's non-combat patronage of his sons (during WWI) and the former president Roosevelt's sons participating in front line combat. Another interesting fact: three of Roosevelt's four sons died in military service--one killed in action, one dead of a heart attack a month after D-Day and one day before he was to be promoted to major general, and one a suicide). The fourth suffered from the long term effects of severe war wounds.
   
   Roosevelt is also revealed as a founding father of the original progressive movement...born out of the Republican party, no less. "Progressive" used to mean advocating sensible capitalism through the restraint of unlimited power of large corporations (through the Sherman Act) and the promotion of sound environmental policy and conservation. It also demanded the U.S. government uphold its main role--that of national defense. This is in stark contrast to today's "progressive" thinking--complete rejection of market economics and corporations, radical environmentalism, and pacifism. Roosevelt must spin in his grave.
   
   All in all a great primer of the former president. Makes you want to immediately run out and read more.



4. Completely understanding TR is impossible without considering his children, or his own childhood for that matter. These are the foci of the "The Lion's Pride: Theodore Roosevelt and His Family in Peace and War." TR was deeply influenced by his father, a wealthy and generous, many would claim great man whose most glaring defect and regret was what amounted to a buy out of his Civil War service obligation. TR called him the "greatest man I ever knew." Yet, in many respects TR spent the rest of his life attempting to overcome and reverse this blemish upon the family record through extraordinary patriotism and service. Leading at the apex of conflict and danger was the duty of a great and privileged family. This credo was embraced wholeheartedly by his children, which makes for fascinating reading. While some would argue this compulsion became excessive and detrimental, the Roosevelt's had no regrets and curiously embraced their family tragedies in the midst of great pain. This phenomenon is particularly evident in the death of the youngest, Quintin while flying patrol over German lines in WWI. On the other hand, if you are looking for an in depth look at any one or more of the children this book will not suffice. Indeed, the early chapters focus on TR's life leading up to WWI, while the latter chapters are largely dedicated to his offspring's activities in young adulthood, particularly those related to the Great War. There is little regarding TR's close and often tender relationship with his children during their childhood in the White House or at Sagamore Hill. As a result, while I greatly enjoyed this book, I was hoping for more breadth and insight into the children's upbringing and their lives after TR's death.



5. This is an excellent work about Theodore Roosevelt as a father. Although the author discusses his children throughout the book, the focus is on TR himself. One thing I have admired about President Roosevelt is that he loved being a father (although his relationship with his oldest daughter, Alice, was strained), and this drew me to read this book. I was not disappointed.
   
   The author also gives us a glimpse into TR's father, Theodore Roosevelt, Sr., who was a very generous man with his time and money. After reading about him, I understood why TR valued public service.
   
   Because the author focuses on the president, the reader will see how TR influenced his children to value public service. For example, all of his sons served in the military. Indeed, Quentin Roosevelt died as a pilot in a dogfight in World War I. The elder son, Theodore Roosevelt II, led the first wave on Utah Beach in Normandy on D-Day during World War II. He died of a heart attack some weeks later. Archie was declared 100% disabled in both World War I and World War II. Kermit also served well in both wars, but suffered from alcoholism and depression (TR's brother, who was Eleanor Roosevelt's father, also suffered from the same). Also, TR's youngest daughter, Ethel, served as a nurse in France in World War I.
   
   This book is definitely worth reading to get a view of Theodore Roosevelt as a family man. I wish we had more elected officials like him today.

5 comments about Mussolini.

1. This book should have been better edited (to 200 pages), with its numerous typographical errors, and it comes across as more an attempt by the author to show off his knowledge of "Liberal" (pre fascist) Italy (it boggles the novice's mind as to what political beliefs marked one as a Futurist, syndicalist, Giolottian etc) than his insights into Mussolini as a bombastic philanderer, gangster politician, habitual liar, hollow pedant, lifelong coward ( he was discharged from the Army, as a conscript, not war vlounteer, after being wounded in the arse by an accidental grenade explosion in the barracks) and depraved knave.
   
   Packed full of petty details and tedious to the extreme, whilst blissfully ignorant of the wider picture, we are bombarded with rubbish that Mussolini is cultivated in arts, music, philosophy, well versed in journalism, pedagogy,self taught and fluent in English, French and German (instead of being the typical village fool that he is) and that he has been vastly under estimated by contemporaries and historians alike.
   
   The last years of Mussolini are barely covered in the book, which then digresses to random, irrelevant rantings on post war Fascism, and De Felice's monumental rubbish that tries to restore and repair the bruised reputation of Mussolini, as if he ever had one that matteed.
   
   I recommend Denis Mack Smith penetrating and coincise biography on this ass of a man instead.



2. Unlike most biographies, Bosworth's book actually starts from late in Mussolin's life, specifically his last 2 years alive 1944-45 and later resumes with Mussolini's birth and childhood and moves on to his adulthood as a teacher and writer and traces his political beginnings which were actually as a socialist. Later on it describes how Mussolini turned to fascism, gained power, and the prewar years and World War II. I was a little surprised at how much damage Mussolini did to Libya and Ethiopia as well as the magnitude of the killings of the local populations in those areas carried out by the Italians. The book includes a section of photographs as well as maps, footnotes, and bibliography. The last chapter even gives an account of the travels of Mussolini's corpse after he was executed and put on diplay in Milan. As much as this was a biography of Mussolini, it also seemed to be an analysis of fascism as a whole and how much harm that ideology and Mussolini were for Italy and the Italian people, as well as the above mentioned areas of Africa, and Europe. All in all, it was an interesting read, however, one can only pity the Italian people for having to put up with such poor, damaging, and detrimental leadership for such a long time, during an especially critical part of their history. I believe the fact that Mussolini is mentioned in the same breath with such a harmful leader as Hitler is indeed fitting and appropriate.



3. Richard Bosworth is an academic specialized in modern Italian history, who improbably teaches at the University of Western Australia. After reading his spin-off of this book, I decided to read this book.
   
   Bosworth doesn't disappoint with this exceptionally well-written biography of one of the more unpleasant individuals to rule Italy. Anyone who was expelled from school for knifing a fellow student, who accepted foreign money for influencing his country's politics towards bringing it into a disastrous war, who didn't shy from using violence and murder to advance his political ends, who openly and flagrantly dishonored his marital vows, who used racial and religious animosities for political ends, and under whose command poison gas was used against Ethiopians cannot be a statesman, and ought have no place in politics. In this book the strong impression arises that Bosworth went out of his way to be fair to the "duce" but that there just was little that was flattering to be said for him. However, when Bosworth describes Preston's biography of Franco as "authoritative," and compares him to the other unelected European leaders of his time, I am not persuaded that Bosworth was as meticulously fair-minded.
   
   Bosworth describes himself as a proud product of 1789, and writes that he is quite open to hearing criticisms that his politics color his historiography. I do believe this to be the case: Bosworth is quite willing to describe the pathology of the duce, but doesn't ponder why Italians were willing to tolerate such a loathsome individual as their leader. A possible explanation, whose omission is easily explained by Bosworth's unabashed identification with the fateful year of 1789, is that Italy was not so much a single country, as several countries which had uneasily been united during the Risorgimento. Milan and Turin were completely different from Sicily and Calabria, and the former Papal States between them were yet different again. Perhaps the Italians of his day were initially willing to let a demagogue and thug bind together "the Italies," to use Bosworth's words, because their country was far too heterogeneous to withstand the centrifugal forces democracy can unleash. I believe an approach more along the ideas of Edmund Burke would have far preferable to trying to force 1789 onto a rather fractured country. Better eight solid and slows steps forward than twelve rapid steps forwards and sixteen tortured steps backwards.
   
   Bosworth writes that any historian of Italy must take pains to ensure that he doesn't absorb preconceived notions about Italy, and it is clear that Bosworth does his utmost to avoid this trap. I suspect that it is precisely in this endeavor, that Bosworth comes to the conclusion that if Italy had only been more like other liberal European countries, none of this would have happened. In my opinion, Italy was Italy, because it was different, and it would have been preferable not to try to overcome, but rather to make use of, Italy's differences.
   
   I would strongly recommend this impressively-written and quite sobering look at Mussolini to anyone who can distinguish between Bosworth's laudable historiography and his less authoritative political views.



4. RJ Bosworth makes an interesting attempt at writing a positive biography of Mussolini. This book does a decent job of summarizing parts of the Duce's life but does jump around quite a bit. Many of the things that make this book useful are in relation to how it reacts to other biographies and accounts of Mussolini. Bosworth glazes over many of the foreign policy decisions which are where so many other biographies are highly critical of Mussolini. It is noteworthy to try and write a biography that puts Mussolini in a different light and when combined with Dennis Mack Smith's biography of Mussolini (which is pretty negative) the reader can get a great sense of Mussolini himself. Bosworth is one of the premiere Italian historians and his work is always insightful and well done. The only compliant I have with this book is the jumping around and skipping over areas. The Brenner Pass meeting is not covered in this book and that is one of the pivotal moments in Mussolini's life and Italian history. I still would recommend this book through as long as it is being read with other sources to get a more complete picture.



5. It seems like I have been studying World War II all my life, but a glaring deficiency in my education is my lack of knowledge concerning the intricacies of Fascist Italy. This caused me to pick up a used copy of this book the other day and I wasn't disappointed. I will say though that I thought the font on the paperback edition was too small, and I share this here just in case anyone else is really annoyed by small print. Bosworth's accounting of Il Duce was complete and fascinating. His narration skills are strong although his contempt for Mussolini definitely comes across in these pages which is really the only criticism that I have. Clocking in at around 430 pages, this text packs a serious punch and provides a brimming overview of the man and his times. The panorama he gives on Italy and the Italian people also made it well worth the money. Mussolini was more than a brutal clown, and Bosworth's study of him allows us to realize this.

No comments about Presidential Courage: Brave Leaders and How They Changed America 1789-1989 (Large Print Press).

3 comments about In His Own Words.

1. This is a compilation of Nelson Mandela's speeches divided into twelve categories that run a diverse classification. The topics run the gamut of historical: "Struggle" "Freedom", "Reconciliation", "Nation Building" and "Development"; social: "Education", "Culture", "Religion", "Health" and "Children"; Cross sectional: "Heroes" and "Peace". The collection provides a one source to obtain the works of a key twentieth century person, but like any of these IN HIS OWN WORDS is repetitive and at times boring. Unless needed for a school assignment, this biographical oratory is best savored over several weeks as Mr. Mandela through his words show why he remains an inspirational influential individual whose speeches provide a deep insight into the man, the legend, and an era of transition.
   
   Harriet Klausner



2. Rebeccasreads highly recommends IN HIS OWN WORDS for those who have ever wondered how this man moved generations of people to agitate for civil rights. Settle down with this big, big book & relive the ideas that inspired us, & get a rare glimpse of the heroes from another time & another place.
   
   Because these are public speeches, there will be repetition - relax & let the words flow over you. & while most of us won't notice it, what we read from the book in no way indicates the timbre, cadence & nuances of the spoken word, so it would have been a wonderful completion had a DVD sound recording of one or two of Nelson Mandela's speeches been included.
   
   The extraordinary power of IN HIS OWN WORDS is in, once again, hearing legend's way of expressing himself, who, along with Mahatma Gandhi & Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., is one of the most articulate, courageous, & respected men of our time. The list of people who contributed their impressions is extraordinary, & illustrates how deeply Nelson Mandela changed our lives & our world.



3. IN HIS OWN WORDS is perfect reading for history buffs. There are 545 pages of speeches, addresses and statements of Nelson Mandela. When you read this collection of words by Mr. Mandela, you come away with a better understanding of this man who has dedicated his life to his belief of freedom and equality.
   
   Nelson Mandela is a prolific writer as well as a gifted speaker. There are twelve chapters in IN HIS OWN WORDS. Because of its length, I suggest that you read this book by first reading the topics that most interest you. I started with Education, Health and Culture and was moved by Nelson Mandela's compassion and his tenacity to remain focused in his one man crusade for democracy for all people. As someone who enjoys reading about history, I read the remaining chapters over several weeks and found them to be fascinating. Very much worth reading.
   
   Vannie(~.~)
   Work & Family @ BellaOnline.com
   http://www.bellaonline.com/Site/workandfamily

2 comments about The Quotable Jefferson.

1. Thomas Jefferson was a man of many facets. Among these were the power of words,
   chosen carefully from the English language. He loved and excelled in writing letters,
   and this book contains over 500 subjects that he chose to write about. Tho the book is small in size with over 500 pages, it gives one an insight into the enormity of this
   President's capacity.



2. I have been reading about the founding fathers for some time and decided to get this book because Jefferson is an obsession of mine. The Quotes in this great book range from his thoughts on the governments of the U.S. and France, thoughts on family, contemporaries, food, books, morals and everything in between. The quotes are funny and inspiring. If you have an interest in Jefferson, then this book is for you.

5 comments about Flawed Giant: Lyndon Johnson and His Times, 1961-1973.

1. Capt. Lance Sijan, USAF Medal of Honor winner, was tortured to death while a captive in a North Vietnam prison. Gerry Coyle, Army PFC, died in Tay Ninh . Bill Fahey, Marine PFC, died in Quang Tri . Leo Matylewicz, an Army Spec 4, had his body literally blown to pieces in Kontum. Dave Rozelle was killed in Quang Tri while a Marine Lance Corporal. Tom Malloy, Army Spec 4, died in Bien Hoa. Mike Turose's body was never recovered for a return home or even a burial when his F-4 was shot down over North Vietnam. Dick Christy was killed over Cambodia when his forward air control aircraft was shot down. Mike Bosiljevac's remains were not recovered until Vietnam opened up to allow forensic search teams years after the war was over - 20 years after he was shot down over North Vietnam. Mike Blassie's remains were placed in the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. in 1998 DNA testing identified the remains as Mike. He had been shot down over An Loc.
   Why do I list these men killed in Vietnam as the introduction to this review of Robert Dallek's biography of Lyndon Johnson - "Flawed Giant"? Because Lyndon Johnson as President of the United States from Jack Kennedy's assassination until 1968 might as well have pulled the trigger or pressed the button that sent them to their deaths. Jane Fonda may have posed on the North Vietnamese anti-aircraft weapons but Lyndon Johnson placed those men in harm's way - for no reason other than his fantastic ego. Let me quote Dallek's afterword:
   "Vietnam was a larger mistake. It was the worst foreign policy disaster in the country's history. Aside from the sacrifice of the many brave men and women who lost their lives or suffered because of the conflict, there seems nothing heroic about the struggle. ... Vietnam was a morass. The battlefield clashes and constant discussions in Washington and Saigon about the war were a confusion leading nowhere. ... the planning for Vietnam led to unproductive commitments in what came to seem like an open-ended conflict.
   ...
   "The principal products of administration discussions about the fighting were false hopes, self-generated illusions, and paranoid fears of domestic opponents, who were not the Communist dupes Johnson believed them to be but men and women devoted to the national security and well-being as anyone in the government and military."
   "Johnson knew from the first that he might be pursuing a losing case in Vietnam."
   "Even less flattering to LBJ is the reality that he also pursued the war for selfish motives. To admit failure on so big an issue as Vietnam would have been too jarring to Johnson's self-image as a can-do leader."
   During the 1964 presidential campaign when Johnson ran against Goldwater, one of the Democrat slogans was "If you vote for Goldwater your sons will be in Vietnam." Well, my parents voted for Goldwater and I ended up in Vietnam.
   This book covers the years from 1961 to Johnson's death in 1973. Of course there is more than Vietnam. Johnspn's outstanding record on civil rights is well covered. But, for me, I cannot help but think about being in the Boy Scouts with Mike Turose and wondering what our futures would be after we got out of engineering school. Fortunately for me. I ended up with a future. Thanks to Lyndon Johnson, Mike didn't.



2. Over the last several years I've read more than 30 presidential biographies, usually letting Amazon reader's guide me to the best choice. While I would place Dallek's LBJ Volume 1 in the top five presidential biographies, Volume two is not quite in the same class. Dallek continues to write well, and I think he presents a complex man and a very difficult time in a balanced way. But over half of this biography details the morass of Viet Nam, and it is truly depressing to read as Johnson and his advisers relentlessly lead the country over the cliff.
   
   During the first two years of LBJ's presidency he led the US Congress to pass some of the most significant legislation in our history - Medicare, greatly increased low income housing, legal aid, increased funding for education and student loans, the most important civil rights legislation of the 20th Century, and the Great Society legislation, a muddled effort to end poverty.
   
   Then, slowly and inexorably LBJ took the US deeper and deeper into Viet Nam. Dallek argues that whatever other geo-political factors were involved, LBJ's drive to be a great president and his fear of failing made the Viet Nam catastrophe inevitable. Johnson simply could not admit to being the first president to lose a war, he couldn't cope with the reality of the corruption of Viet Nam's leadership, and he couldn't stand to be honest in telling the American people just how poorly the war was going. Dallek presents a president who was increasingly paranoid of a nonexistent communist menace influencing the anti-war movement and of Bobby Kennedy leading JFK's ghost to steal LBJ's legacy.
   
   Today, there are numerous editorials comparing the war in Iraq to Vietnam (or denying any comparison). I've yet to see an article comparing President Bush to LBJ, and in most ways they are polar opposites. Still, this biography is very timely. There are unmistakable similarities between America's descent into the two wars, Iraq and South Viet Nam's lack of resources to provide leadership to their own people, our leaders' reluctance to level with the US, the isolation each president sought to avoid criticism, and a society that was so polarized by other issues that it is somehow ok to not take an objective look at the facts of the war.



3. Robert Dallek completes his two volume biography of Lyndon B. Johnson with "Flawed Giant". Its a well written book that tells the story of a brilliant politician who is overwhelmed and outmatched by events he failed to anticipate.
   
   The book begins with Johnson in the unhappy position of serving as Vice President under John F. Kennedy. A most difficult place for a man of Johnson's ego and stature to find himself. Nevertheless, Johnson struggles and does the best he can with this job obtaining recognition in his efforts to further U.S. diplomacy abroad and advance the space program.
   
   On November 22, 1963, President Kennedy is assassinated and Johnson becomes President. No one could ever accuse Johnson of not seizing the moment and this he does masterfully. Within a year, he obtains passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and a number of domestic initiatives aimed at reducing poverty and improving quality of life for Americans that become known as the "Great Society". Johnson's accomplishments as President all took place during the first two years of his presidency. Some of those accomplishments include the Head Start Program for disadvantaged children, a federal student loan program for college students, the Job Corps program for kids who dropped out of school, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 which enfranchised millions of blacks, the National Endowment for the Arts, and Medicare.
   
   Johnson proves his skill as a politician by defeating opponent Barry Goldwater with almost 62% of the vote in the 1964 election. Unfortunately, these same skills waned as time went on. By the end of 1965, the positive accomplishments of the Johnson Presidency had come to an end. Johnson inherited the Vietnam War from his predecessor, John F. Kennedy. However, he made a series of mistakes after doing so. First, he concluded that America had to hold onto South Vietnam and prevent a "take over" by the North. He never grasped that the conflict was not an attack by the communist world upon the free world, but simply a regional civil war that had gone for decades. Second, he failed to grasp early on that the conflict was not winnable by conventional means, so he committed 500,000 American soldiers. Third, he failed to understand that the American people wouldn't stand idly by for years supporting such a war with no measurable progress being made. Fourth, he failed to consider steps such as simply withdrawing when it did become apparent that the war was unwinnable.
   
   As the Johnson Presidency unfolds, the accomplishments of the Great Society are overwhelmed by the Vietnam War. Johnson finally realizes his mistake at the end of his presidency. He announces he won't run again and initiates peace talks with North Vietnam.
   
   One must look at Johnson carefully and not jump to conclusions. He was a complicated man who did much good during his presidency. Sadly, though, he will most likely be remembered for the Vietnam War which cost America 58,000 lives.



4. I sped through last year reading all three mammoth books in Robert A. Caro's Pulitzer Prize-winning LBJ biography series, and found them an incredibly readable, detailed portrayal of a man who was half megalomaniac, half incredibly gifted politician, a complex American Shakespearean character whose presidency crumbled into self-induced tragedy. Caro hasn't written the final book in his series yet concentrating on LBJ's presidency, so I decided to check out a competing LBJ biography by Dallek focusing on those years. And it's solid history, with great insight into LBJ's character and the disastrous decisions he made in Vietnam that undermined all the powerful social changes he achieved in civil rights and Medicare. Yet "Flawed Giant" is also kind of a slog, which Caro's books weren't. I can't quite put my finger on it, but Dallek lacks the fluid prose, deft research into place and era, and storytelling talent that Caro brought to LBJ - I was able to read hundreds of pages about dry as toast subjects like congressional redistricting and vote tallies and found them compelling reading under Caro. Yet here, I ended up getting bored silly by Dallek's bland recitation of the ups and downs of Vietnam, which you think would be interesting stuff. Dallek is a bit more even-handed in his appreciation of LBJ than Caro, but it just all felt a little too much like work. Guess it goes to show that it's as much in the storyteller as it is in the story. I'll be eagerly awaiting Caro's take on this same era, whenever it comes out.



5. Fine, scholarly biography of the Ph.D.-thesis type. Dallek relies mainly on documentary sources (which he reviewed copiously). The result is somewhat detached.
   
   You get little feel for the lengendary "Johnson treatment" that LBJ used to such great effect. There is, though, much quasi-psychological stuff. Johnson was poorly educated but intellectually brilliant. He was absolutely driven. He was Lincoln-like in his humor, his yarns, his frontier similes. But these gifts were often misdirected. He just had to be first, the best, at everything. He was frighteningly insecure, almost to the point of true paranoia. There are many stories of his abuse of subordinates.
   
   Dallek is a New Deal/Great Society liberal, and this viewpoint pervades. He is mostly enthusiastic about the Great Society and civil rights achievements, but scathing about Johnson's handling of Vietnam. The most revealing part is the recital of how Johnson felt forced to back into the war, and to try to do it almost surreptitiously. Reassuringly, Dallek presents Johnson as simply misguided and ill-advised. There is none of that Oliver Stone crap about being a tool of the military-industrial complex.
   
   Robert Caro's latest volume in his multi-volume opus, "The Master of The Senate", takes Johnson only up to 1960. Dallek's two volumes cover Johnson's whole life. Caro puts in ten years of research for every one that Dallek has put in, and Caro's doggedness is beyond herioc. Dallek is a solid, straightforward writer (unusual for an academic), but he has little of Caro's inspired literary style. Flesh, blood, and sinew pervade Caro's books. Dallek's sounds like a political science seminar.
   
   Read it by all means, if you are interested in Johnson. But wait for Caro's next volume is you want the definitive treatment.