Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower
by William Blum
Average Customer Review:
Paperback (May, 2000)
list price: $18.95 -- our price: $12.89
(price subject to change: see help)
US | Canada | United Kingdom | Germany | France

Reviews (50)

Read It
Blum is a socialist and his political biases are reflected in this condensed overview of American overseas (and domestic) atrocities.Blum's opinion seems to be that absolutely everything America has done overseas has been entirely out of self-interest and an extension of US Imperialism, that America is the real Evil Empire, etc.I wouldn't go that far personally, but if nothing else this book knocks down the perception of America as uniquely moral or "better" in its foreign affairs than other powerful nations throughout history.
Only a complete moron would deny all the events in this work (covering up their stupidity with cries of "anti-Americanism" or some other juvenile nonsense), but, as has been said in other reviews, many could be open to more interpretations than Blum's"down with capitalism" underlying theme (why does he choose to ignore the many crimes under socialist-esque countries; Ethiopia, USSR, China, North Korea, etc.) Also with China saber-rattling towards Taiwan, his arguments for decreasing the US military budget by 90% seem a bit extreme (he has argued this in several articles but not in this book).

In my opinion the sections on the US's use of chemical and biological weapons alone makes this book worth a read, particularly the VERY disturbing quote by a Dr. Donald MacArthur on a new microorganism virus program that, when produced, would be resistant to all the human processes that protect us from infectious disease...now do I have to spell this out for you? (actually it took me several readings of that passage before I realized what Blum was hinting at...it's still hard to swallow, but there are other books on this likelihood, notably "State of Origin" by Boyd Graves).

There are CIA operations left out of this work as Blum says in the Interventions since 1945 chapter, notably the Operations Northwoods scheme against Cuba (your tax dollars at work, sheesh!)Overall though, Rogue State is an excellent balancing act to American triumphalism.Commies, anarchists, libertarians, and progressives will love this book, as will anyone genuinely interested in the more unsavory side of American policies.However I recommend reading alternative views on American overseas operations as well.After all, for millions of refugees, America is still a Great Nation.

not Blum's "piece de resistance" (that's Killing Hope)
This book isn't Blum's best, however it is still very informative and well-written. You can find out the following things:
-- excerpts from training manuals with titles like "A Study of Assassination", "Human Resource Exploitation Training Manual", "Psycological Operations in Guerilla Warfare (p.43)
-- a list of assassination attempts on foreign leaders (p.38)
-- chapters on depleted uranium & cluster bombs
-- the US government used/tested chemical/biological weapons in: the Bahamas, Canada (can't forgive my government for allowing that...), China & Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Panama, Cuba (p.103)
-- the US government tested chemical/biological weapons on its own people in Watertown (NY), San Francisco, Minneapolis, St Louis, Washington DC, Florida, Savannah, Avon Park, NYC, Chicago as well as deliberate releases of radioactive material (p.113)
-- the US government encouraged the use of chemical or biological weapons by other nations (p.120)
-- a list of countries that have used torture, with handbooks, encouragement, etc provided by the CIA (p.50)
-- the US government has been 'spying' on the rest of the world via the super-secret Echelon system & other stuff (p.200)
-- during Operation Desert Storm the Iraqi Kurds got hold of 18 tons of Iraqi government documents which are now on public display at the U of Colorado @ Boulder (p.213)
-- similarily, after the Berlin Wall came down, the CIA got hold of the top-secret archives of the Stasi, East Germany's intelligence agency, and refused to return it for 9 years. Clinton wouldn't even discuss it with Schroeder. (p.212)
-- a list of CIA narcotrafficking operations, when they worked with the mafia, organised crime, etc (p.218)

and so on... Pretty much all of Blum's footntes include mainstream media, academic journals, official government documents (declassified or public), and so on. None of this looks like paranoid "conspiracy" stuff when you look at where he finds out these things that he says. This book is the perfect antidote for people who are tired of the same-old "mainstream" stuff we see on TV, or who are wondering if, say, the Iraqi prisoner abuse scandal is an exception to the rule or is just another typical incident. It's not Blum's 'piece de resistance' (Killing Hope) but it's still pretty good.

Blum's got it wrong
Why does the whole world hate America?I'm not sure the whole world does, actually. How do I know this?Well, every time I fly into LAX, JFK or Miami Intl. I feel like I've arrived in Calcutta.Those airports are so crowded with 3rd Worlders trying to get in to the oppressive, war-criminal America that they'll stand patiently in line for hours waiting to pass Customs and Immigration.Oh, and speaking of exporting your awful culture to other countries, I wouldn't be surprised to see one of these families roasting a goat on the floor on my next trip north. So don't believe it guys, you're doing just fine. For every hysterical old hippie like Blum there are 1000 3rd Worlders voting with their feet.I mean, when's the last time you saw boat people LEAVING America?

As for Europeans. It may come as a shocking revelation to Blum, but just about every one of them is a little busy tryinbg to earn a paycheck to think much about other countries.

I rellyreally bought this book, but I couldn't get past the first half of it. It reads like all of the other trend-of-the-moment It's All America's Fault... hate... war criminals... imperialists... globalization (wasn't it YOUR jobs that went overseas)?I mean, were do these loons get this stuff? Why do they support sweaty, dangerous, dysfunctional countries? Who knows.Me, I'll take Manhattan.
... Read more

Isbn: 1567511945
Sales Rank: 83857
Subjects:  1. 1945-1989    2. 1989-    3. Current Affairs    4. Foreign countries    5. Foreign relations    6. Government - U.S. Government    7. Government policy    8. Human rights    9. International Relations - General    10. Intervention (International law)    11. Military policy    12. Political    13. Political Freedom & Security - International Secur    14. Politics - Current Events    15. Politics/International Relations    16. United States   

Derailing Democracy: The America the Media Don't Want You to See
by David McGowan
Average Customer Review:
Paperback (01 March, 2000)
list price: $17.95 -- our price: $17.95
(price subject to change: see help)
US | Canada | United Kingdom | Germany | France

Reviews (20)

paranoia
.....A few word will suffice here:this book is a gutter raker and nothing more.A crying towl for all the inncocents of the 3rd world and 4th world who sit on their little thrones of garbage and blame the USA for not picking it up fast enough. Where was europe when kosovo was being destroyed? nowhere!! and who came to pull them out of their quandry..?The USA..Now this country is being blamed for being to rough, to Bad!!And where is europe when islamic killers blow up airplanes and synagogues? nowhere!!!Once again the europeans are afraid of offending their muslim masters (much like before the crusades).And, yes I am proud of our unilateralism, we are not an appendage of the UN with it's Treaty of the Month Club.Let's see how islam does with its honor killings and sharai before we sign away our rights with the weaklings of the world.

Derailing Democracy By David McGowan: A Review
When I read the synopsis of this book on the back cover I instantly knew this book would be interesting.Just as the title states this book is derailing democracy, sending it head over heels.Democracy would be an excellent form of government.Having the right to vote people into office instead of them just being appointed.All of the citizens having his or her own voice to change things for the better.In theory this sounds like the only truly fair and just government.When we think of the beautiful land we call the U.S.A we instantly associate it with freedom and justice for all with every man created equal.Derailing democracy shows the darker side and the price we pay for this "freedom".Whether it be giving the Taliban three million dollars in the 1980's, or basically hiring Saddam Huessien to wipe out Iran.Ironically many of the weapons that are killing the American soldiers now are either the left over landmines they planted decades ago or the weapons and ammunition they gave to Saddam and his men.But obviously the people of this country would not vote to give our enemies weapons to kill our other enemies, it doesn't make sense.What David McGowan shows us is that there are many ways to get around the whole democracy idea.For example the government tries to "market" the bill they want passed as something that will benefit the general public.For example McGowan writes, "You may have noticed that many of the motorists you see pulled over on the side of the highway are black or Hispanic.You may have attributed to this to some kind of unspoken law-enforcement racism.You may be surprised to learn that it's the result of a federal program.Called Operation Pipeline"
Page 1
Page 2
(McGowan 69).
Another example could be tax hikes to fund "anti-terrorism", with the majority ofthe money actually going to fund the bombing in Kosovo and Iraq.In 1997 President Bill Clinton said to the American public, with no emotion, that they were dropping serious amounts of bombs onto the city of Kosovo.No more than an hour later he was on the news again, with deep shame and sympathy, to alert the public about the shooting at Columbine High School.The man felt more emotion for the small few who perished in the high school as compared to the small catastrophe he was creating overseas.But McGowan shows us that to the Government deaths are all just numbers,and death won't stand in the way of conquering a weaker country.And that's basically what it all comes down to, we're stronger than you and you have something that is valuable to us, so we're going to beat you up and take it.Yeah, make sure to get their lunch money too.
Another area of study in this book is racial issues, mostly within the judicial system.An interesting fact stated in this book says that "approximately 80% of the young black men under age 35 have a criminal record" (70).I am immersed in this urban culture daily and I definitely don't believe that 80 per cent of the African Americans I see have done anything to deserve a criminal record. "Blacks and whites in the U.S.A. are the victims of murder in almost equal numbers, yet 82 per cent of prisoners executed since 1977 were convicted of the murder of a white person...Blacks make up just 12 per cent of the country's population, but 42 per cent of the nation's condemned prisoners.In early 1998, of the 26 people under federal sentence of death (military and civilian), only five prisoners were white" (72).According to these facts it becomes more and more
Page 3
clear to me that we as a country are still in the same old mindset that we were over 50 years ago.No matter what anyone says our government is still racially bias to white people.I don't believe that even a quarter of the citizens of this country are racist.If we have all power and control of our democratic government then why is the government racist and we are not?Perhaps the people who are racist have just fallen under the subliminal propaganda of the racist government.
With all of the anti-drug propaganda it would surprise you to hear that "In 1996, the San Jose Mercury News ignited a firestorm of protest when it ran a series of articles by investigative journalist Gary Webb that seemed to provide substantial evidence of U.S. government complicity in drug trafficking.In an effort to circumvent a congressional ban and provide illegal funding for the Nicaraguan Contras, the CIA had, it was alleged, allowed and even assisted the trafficking of massive amounts of cocaine into this country" (104).With all of the anti-drug commercials I was under the impression that the government wanted to stop drug use, not encourage it.But I suppose it did help out the economy.And who knows, maybe because the government sold drugs your taxes didn't rise.
In conclusion David McGowan doesn't try to mince words here.He clearly states many facts that he has collected from different sources.All of which are documented and respected.I believe that if every American would just read a few of the facts something good could happen.Basically McGowan states that this democracy is starting to look more and more like a hypocrisy, resorting to tactics normally reserved for dictatorships.Lets face it, politicians lie, McGowan just points that out.He never once
Page 4
tries to force his views, he instead encourages freedom of thought.

Exposing gross hypocrisy and injustices
Packed with numerous essential facts, this book provides a detailed account of serious transgressions and violations of international law perpetrated by the U.S. government, the facts which can be ignored and dismissed only by jingoists. This book reveals an extremely flawed foreign policy of the United States. McGowan argues that the U.S. foreign policy makers seek to protect strategic and economic interests of the U.S. at any cost, even if many innocent people have to be sacrificed, that is as long as they are not Americans. According to McGowan, U.S. has shown no signs that it cares about the poor, the victimized and the oppressed. On the contrary, U.S. has consistently and systematically opposed every U.N. resolution stipulating a right to food and acknowledging children's rights and the rights of Palestinians. Morever, U.S. has vetoed every U.N. resolution calling for a condemnation of Israeli human rights violations. No one seems to wonder why no U.N. inspectors have been allowed to enter the facilities in Israel in which weapons of mass destruction have been produced. Why does not the U.S. coerce Israel to cooperate with the U.N.? Why does the U.S. knowingly hamper development of poor countries? Why does not the U.S. ratify the agreement banning the use of chemical and biological weapons? Why does the U.S. collaborate with terrorists when it serves the interests of the U.S.? This book divulges unfathomable injustices and gross violations of international law perpatrated by the only remaining superpower in the world. Even though this book contains a great number of important facts, it lacks a detailed analysis and for that reason I gave it four stars. For an elaborate and meticulous analysis of the U.S. foreign policy, I strongly recommend a book called Why do people hate America by Ziauddin Sardar and Merryl Wyn Davies; irrefutably the best book on the subject matter. ... Read more

Isbn: 1567511848
Sales Rank: 308600
Subjects:  1. 1980-    2. 1989-    3. Government - U.S. Government    4. Media Studies    5. Miscellanea    6. Political Freedom & Security - Civil Rights    7. Political Ideologies - Democracy    8. Political Science    9. Politics - Current Events    10. Politics and government    11. Politics/International Relations    12. Social conditions    13. Social problems    14. United States    15. Current Events    16. Politics   

The Culture of Terrorism
by Noam Chomsky
Average Customer Review:
Paperback (01 January, 1988)
list price: $18.00 -- our price: $12.24
(price subject to change: see help)
US | Canada | United Kingdom | Germany | France

Reviews (3)

thorough, persuasive, excellent
It has become impossible to write a review of a Chomsky piece without focusing a large content of the review on Chomsky himself (witness ... slew of one-star versus five-star reviews of all his books, which often feature personal opinion rather than genuine, responsible argument). Being something of a free-thinker with an interest in politics and psychology, I've understandably been drawn toward the debate surrounding Chomsky and his stunning claims about the nature of Western (usually US) policy -- and have been very disappointed with the childish nature of that debate, as it has declined hopelessly toward name-calling and a ridiculous skewing of facts and quotes. How does a person know who to believe? (I should reiterate that it really has become a case of "who", not "what", as if the merit of an argument has anything to do with its author.)

With that state of mind I decided that the best way to get a handle on these astonishing claims about Western policy would be to actually read a book by its most prominent critic. Deciding which book to read wasn't a problem, since, of the two bookstores and one library in my area, an obscure 1980's text called "The Culture of Terrorism" was the only of Chomsky's publications that I could find.

The first two chapters, in introducing the main thesis -- that, unlike the US government's claim to "further the cause of democracy" worldwide, the US's policy is actually to maintain control of as much of the Third World as possible via manipulation of its governmental systems -- assume a familiarity with the Iran-Contra dealings and the US invasion of Nicaragua, and, since I was rather ignorant of these matters, at first the book only served to alienate me.

But from Chapter 3 onward, the book is a focused exercise in intense -- and superior -- fact-finding, very effectively discrediting the popular, US media-supported claims that America was doing Nicaragua a favor by funding a guerrilla movement to destroy its government and replace it with a more America-friendly one. The book argues that the Sandinistas, far from being a perfect government, were certainly a step in the right (or, rather, left) direction for Central America -- making Nicaragua an intolerable ideological exception to the US's (unstated) insistence that the world remain effectively owned by businesses and the upper-class, at the terrible expense of poor people's rights and living conditions. Chomsky provides a thorough and shocking contrast of American media reports of the Central America situation (with even the "respected" media -- e.g. the New York Times, Washington Post, etc. -- acting as a virtual mouthpiece for US government propaganda) and the disinterested overseas media and human rights groups that reported much more objectively and responsibly on the same incidents.

Half the book is about the reality of the US invasions of Nicaragua, while the other half is about how horrendously the submissive domestic media was able to butcher the facts. I found both parts of the book to be extremely well-researched and persuasive -- not to mention surprisingly hilarious in parts (nobody writes with more humor about state-sponsored terrorism than Noam Chomsky).

Being born in America, and having grown to be very critical and cynical of it, I'm certainly susceptible to the idea -- as forwarded by most of Chomsky's critics -- that a major reason for his appeal is not because he is a great historian, but that he provides endless fodder for anti-American views. In other words, for people who call themselves "free thinkers" (as I did above), it becomes tempting to cling to the opinions of like-minded souls, regardless of the fact that their arguments may lack merit. I will allow that, to a certain extent, this phenomenon does apply to me. However, having finished "The Culture of Terrorism", I returned to the same old websites featuring the same slew of Chomsky-bashing, and tried to find coherent arguments to the effect that Chomsky's analysis of the US invasion of Nicaragua was anything but dead-on. I could find nothing. For this reason, I should stress that I wholeheartedly enjoyed "The Culture of Terrorism", I think its conclusions are extremely well-supported, and I have every reason to believe it is a landmark piece of nonfiction. As for other books by Noam Chomsky -- I haven't read them yet, so I'd feel ludicrous if I were to join all the cheering Chomskyheads in claiming that he can do no wrong. I apologize for writing a review that was probably too lengthy, but unfortunately I felt it necessary to emphasize that my complete, unreserved endorsement for this excellent book was actually a recommendation for the book's argument, not its author. This is a phenomenal study of US domestic and international policies regarding its dealings with Central America in the 1980's -- simple as that.

Chomsky-Nader in 2004!!!!!
Chomsky once again holds the mirror up to America and shows how blatantly hypocritical and disingenuous our foreign policy actually is. In this book his primary focus is on the Reagan administration and Central America, where corporate and military interests were promoted at the expense of the indiginous people and "true" democracy. Recent events (the 2000 Bush "coup", Webb's book on cocaine and the contras, the Columbia "aid" package, etc.) show how truly relevant this research is. Also, do not let the simpletons of the right and the mainstream (is there really a difference between the two anymore?) critique Chomsky without comment or evidence. His research, unlike theirs (on those rare occasions when they actually engage in true journalism) is meticulously documented and uses their own words and documents as source material. One last thing, if you don't get this book then get any book from Chomsky on American economic and foreign policy (I recommend his work on Israel and the Palestinians as a particularly contemporary selection).

Great book!
Enlightening for those who suffer it; outrageous for those whoprofit from it. The culture of terrorism (overt and covert) is verymuch a global reality to deal with. A bad book for those whom the culture of terrorism has managed to brainwash into blind denial and self-censorship. An excellent book for us, 99% of the world oppressed by that culture. ... Read more

Isbn: 0896083349
Sales Rank: 442755
Subjects:  1. 1981-    2. Foreign relations    3. Government policy    4. History & Theory - Radical Thought    5. International Relations - General    6. Iran-Contra Affair, 1985-1990    7. Military policy    8. Political History    9. Politics - Current Events    10. Terrorism    11. United States   

The Hunting of the President : The Ten-Year Campaign to Destroy Bill and Hillary Clinton
by Joe Conason, Gene Lyons
Average Customer Review:
Paperback (03 February, 2001)
list price: $14.95 -- our price: $10.17
(price subject to change: see help)
US | Canada | United Kingdom | Germany | France

Editorial Review

Unhappy reading for Republicans or political naïfs, The Hunting of the President is the story of a sustained and well-funded effort to discredit and defeat Bill Clinton, dating from his gubernatorial days in Arkansas and eventually leading to his impeachment trial. Award-winning journalists Joe Conason and Gene Lyons have crafted a tale as compulsively readable as a political thriller--paced, and at times worded, like a summer bestseller. Although they provide ample evidence of backstabbing, revenge, deceit, conniving, and "dirty tricks" in the struggle to oust Clinton, arguing that "the better the president and the country did, the more his adversaries appeared willing to endorse almost anything short of assassination to do him in," they also acknowledge that Clinton's reckless behavior, along with the "panicky, defensive, and occasionally less-than-perfectly-honest" responses of the White House press office, didn't hurt his opponents. Investigative journalism at its juiciest, The Hunting of the President is a surprising valediction to a far-from-angelic public leader who often outmaneuvered his enemies with otherworldly skill. --Regina Marler ... Read more

Reviews (190)

George "Duh-Buh-Ya" Bush
I always like to read some of the cute reviews from the conservative "cool-aid" drinkers, and how Bill and Hillary wanted to take our guns away! Yee-Haa!!!! Now we got ourselves a ree-pub-nican president!!!! Did you hear that Elli Mae??? We can now buy 50 caliper armor piercing rounds to shoot that big kill!!!! Or how the "sex obsessed" repug-nicans (MMMM SEX BAD!!), who never have sex or affairs with other women, end up somehow sticking their nose into someone else's little escapades. (A.K.A. Rudi Guliani) and his extra marital affairs with multiple women. Or how "George Of Arabia" sent otherwise good kids to war based on a lie. Or is it how that republicans have that moral high ground over liberals, especially when Newt Gingerich served divorce papers on his wife the day after she was recovering from cancer surgery. I think what is sick and disgusting about the whole Clinton thing, is how the republican controlled congress throughout the late 90's had spent millions of dollars investigating everything of the "Clinton matters", from Whitewater to Lewinsky. I read somewhere that over two-hundred FBI agents were assigned to investigate such matters. What if those two-hundred FBI agents had been doing their real job, like returning phone calls from flight training schools, and protecting the American public??? And I think Mr. Gingerich, and Mr. Lott, and the Republican party, owe the American people, and the families of those 3,000 dead; A HUGE F***ing APOLIGY!!!!! For wasting... for wasting the time of our law enforcement, who should have been protecting the American people, instead of looking at stains on blue dresses!!!!! It was the most disgusting period, and lost time.

to S. Crowe- real name
If you're going to submit a review filled with vitriol and allegations of stupidity, you may want to try using spellcheck.

All You Really Need To Know
I lived in Arkansas from 1993 through 1997. Gene Lyons - who was known far and wide as Gene Liars just within the city of Little Rock - has less credibility than Jose Canseco. All anyone needs to know is this: Lyons is the guy who went on "Meet The Press" during the Lewinsky scandal and said that Clinton had 'NEVER' had an extramarital affair with Lewinsky - and he, in essence, blamed the women in a sort of 'reverse Clarence Thomas' defense.

I read the book and it was even less credible than I thought it would be given Lyons' name on it. The conspiracy is incredibly similar to the movie "JFK" where everyone in America EXCEPT for Lee Harvey Oswald was involved in the attempt to kill him. Arkla, Jerry Jones, Richard Mellon Scaife, Fox News Channel - probably even Jimmy Hoffa - were involved in 'destroying Clinton.'

The problems with the notion of a 'vast right-wing' conspiracy - which sounds like something taken out of Pat Robertson's book, "The New World Order" or its predecessor written by an anti-Semitic author, are numerous.

For starters, the opening scandal of Clinton's administration - and what really caused the problems - was Whitewater. Had the media been 'frothing at the mouth' as is often assumed, the NY Times would have destroyed Clinton in April 1992 when Jerry Brown first brought it up in the NY primary. Yet let's consider the FACTS of the entire thing:

1. The original Independent Counsel, Robert Fiske, was appointed by Attorney General Janet Reno in January 1994 - or an entire year before the GOP took over the Congress.

2. His replacement, Kenneth Starr, was appointed by Reno - also in 1994. How this can possibly be the result of a party out of power is beyond my ability to comprehend.

3. Clinton signed on an extension of the Independent Counsel law after it expired. Do you blame Clinton for keeping it going?

4. In the final analysis, it was the President who lied under oath and then did everything possible including attempting to bribe the Senate for an acquittal. Even if we concede that the GOP hired Monica to perform her only obvious talent, they didn't make him take the stand and they didn't make him lie.

5. If this right-wing conspiracy was so strong why could they not:
a. beat Clinton in 1992?
b. beat Clinton in 1996?
c. remove Clinton from office?

At some point a reality check is due - and this book hardly qualifies as one. Lyons and Conason had NO PROBLEM when it was Presidents Nixon and Reagan - and even the first Bush - who were being investigated by Indpendent Counsels. What did Nixon do? Cover up what we all know parties do to one another anyway. What did Reagan do? Violated an unconstitutional law (the Boland amendments).

I'm not advocating what the GOP 'did' to Clinton; but don't ever forget that it would have been impossible with Clinton's self-indulgent help. Just think: the only reason Clinton met Monica in the first place was because he shut down the government in late 1995 and the White House needed free help. ... Read more

Isbn: 0312273193
Subjects:  1. 20th century    2. Conspiracies    3. Conspiracy & Scandal Investigations    4. Current Affairs    5. Government - U.S. Government    6. History    7. Journalism    8. Libel and slander    9. Political    10. Political aspects    11. Politics - Current Events    12. Politics/International Relations    13. United States    14. Political Science / General   

Is Our Children Learning? : The Case Against George W. Bush
by Paul Begala
Average Customer Review:
Paperback (20 September, 2000)
list price: $12.00 -- our price: $12.00
(price subject to change: see help)
US | Canada | United Kingdom | Germany | France

Reviews (83)

You Get what the Crooked Pay For
Well, here we are in 2005
Freedom of speech is barely alive.
Making his mark
While most the world shudders
We sit here silenced for fear of what's uttered.

We tried to vote and save the day,
But that is not the Diebold way.

Prophetic and Devastating
I just bought this book because I thought it would have some funny Texas Bushisms. However, this book was written by Paul Begala (cohost of CNNs Crossfire) about why Bush should not be elected as President in 2000.This insightful book gives details on how Texas's surplus was pandered, a 125 year ban on concealed weapons was overturned (people are even allowed to bring weapons into churches!!) and public school funding was cut, tax cuts to the rich were given and many other things happened where the people of Texas suffered and rich people get very happy.Begala predicted all these same catastrophic events would happen if Bush was elected President.Now it takes guts to have all these assumptions of Bush before he became President in 2000 and Begala did.But what is even more devastating is that every single thing that Begala thought would happen - did!

I wish this was just a horror novel, but unfortunately, it is all non-fiction.

Biased, but fun
Begala's tone is often disparaging and nasty, but it doesn't seem all that bad when you consider who's occupying the White House.
I gave it four stars because I want to see Bush make for Texas as much as Begala does. ... Read more

Isbn: 0743214781
Sales Rank: 230431
Subjects:  1. American    2. Biography    3. Children of presidents    4. Current Affairs    5. Educational Policy & Reform    6. Government - U.S. Government    7. Governors    8. Political    9. Political Process - General    10. Politics - Current Events    11. Politics/International Relations    12. Presidential candidates    13. Texas    14. United States    15. Bush, George W    16. Current Events / General    17. Political and social views    18. Current Events - General   

Downsize This! Random Threats from an Unarmed American
by Michael Moore
Average Customer Review:
Paperback (01 September, 1997)
list price: $13.95 -- our price: $11.16
(price subject to change: see help)
US | Canada | United Kingdom | Germany | France

Editorial Review

Who says the left wing doesn't have a sense of humor? Maybe it doesn't, but documentarian Michael Moore sure does--Exhibit A was Roger & Me; B was the ill-fated TV Nation; and C is 1997's print skirmish Downsize This! Moore's politics are rabidly liberal, populist, and anti-big business--about what you'd expect from the former editor of Mother Jones. While this restricts his audience to Americans on the left side of the aisle, for them Downsize This! will be a chance to point and laugh hysterically (if ruefully) at the clique of rich white guys who run everything.

Moore is at his best as a prankster, whether it's trying to see if Pat Buchanan will take a campaign donation from the John Wayne Gacy Fan Club (yes) or whether he can have Bob Dornan committed to an insane asylum based on his bizarre behavior (no, but it was close). Moore is one of our sharpest satirists, and Downsize This! makes one wish he would write a "Sorry State of the Union" every year. But only if it doesn't cut into his moviemaking--that's too big a price to pay. --Michael Gerber ... Read more

Reviews (135)

How we're living now......
The valuable work Michael Moore does forms the visuals that were once used by network news shows like 60 Minutes and Nightline to highlight the "consumer graft" that took place in our loose bureaucratic system, but applied to government. Government graft is much more fertile soil, however, and easier to report upon, and probably easier to locate - whether Republican or Democrat. The large media networks have given up on the stories, or could be considered part of it, now, so people like Moore are necessary to pick up the slack. It would be interesting to show how well government graft pays in relation to consumer graft, to see how former officials have catapulted themselves to the level of luxury to see how our tax dollars continue to work for them, long after they've left office. Those reality shows aren't typically run, however; it's much easier to appeal to the more important aspects of who needs what now, regardless of whether it is ever delivered through tax dollars. The field of dreams of broken promises to the public looks more like the yellow brick road to a deceptive OZ and the men or women behind the phantom mask that can't or won't deliver from behind the smoke screen that has become government today, well rooted in government yesterday. If government was voluntary self service, not a soul could be found to do it, very likely. So, we tolerate a system of people working for government, its perks and pensions, rather than government helping people survive and flourish. What is civil service about that? If corporate executives and authoritative organizations run the government show, we certainly don't need the "warm bodies" that fill the apparently plush official seats we have to announce their votes. That can be done from the hall of business rather than government.That elected officials, themselves, have become little more than rubber stamps in a rubber stamp world of fundraising for re-election to keep highly sought after golden pedestals is the permanent problem of American democracy (or any government) that no one challenges sufficiently to curb or contain it; yet all know it is the huge mushroom cloud it is that leaves nothing in its wake except cleanup and continuing cost cuts by consumers to keep up with the spread of its radioactive waste. First it was low taxes; now government wants social security cut to feed its exhorbitant appetite for luxury. Perhaps, more Michael Moore's need to be writing about the limits of government graft and how willing the U.S. is to indulge it - to its own demise, and certainly, to curb its own comfort in favor of the few who would convert the principles upon which it is founded to their own privatization campaign of "me first." Government pensions and lifetime salaries cannot help but bury America as government continues to burgeon. Why does no one look at those costs?

First Rate: Humour, Information, andPolemic Wisdom ...
Didactic/Polemic [?]...
Humour pervades this book. At the very least, it can be said to be a good read for those with a sense of humour. However, some do not take Moore's work as humour, mainly for partisanreasons.
A scarey point is , and Moore notes this in an additional section done after the Hard Back was out. His jokes about downsizing everyone and using prisonersas the labour force have been in fact put into action, in fact its a major trend in the penal system. As Moore also notes, the prison system itself may be taken offshore if the plans to build a prison or prisons in Mexico is actuallyallowed to happen; even Moore calls this craziness.
The factual sections of the book have been well researched, and I am sure Moore could substantiate all of the claims made, if you look into the credits for the book, Moore' University researchassistants in this book ( seems to be a trend if you look into Franken's"Team Franken"researchers).
Moore gives plenty of guidelines to things such asthe "Etiquette" of downsizing. And even tests the ethical nature of some groups by forming some legitimate, but far-fetched named groups ( Satanworshippersfor Dole, as one example), making donations by legitimate cheques, and seeing who cashesthe cheques. Whatever can be said about Moore's ideas, he sure can come up with some unforgettable concepts for actions.
He touches on many , very many, ideas that have been held by many, including the destruction of the American Dream.
The Satiricalpoints he makes, such as pointing out that the Republicans and Democrats are not significantlydifferent( somuch so that he labels them the "Republicrats") all make some sort of perversesense.
The Chapter listing pretty muchcovers the areas he covers, except that is more fun to read the contents. New ways to pick a president provides for some chuckles, but seems a little too third worldly... even though he claims that parts of the UScould qualify forthird world status.

An amazing book. No doubt very villified by the conservatives, but if Ann Coulter can get away with her extreme articles, then Mike's extendedseries of "Op-Ed"Chapters can be accepted on that ground alone.

Vintage Moore
This is basically familiar Michael Moore fare.The chapter that stands out is "Why Doesn't GM Sell Crack?" Republicans have succeeded for far too long in convincing people that deregulation and tort reform are tantamount to personal freedom and liberty, and that laws that protect people from products and services that cause injury and suffering and even death are tyrannical and totalitarian.I can not believe the degree to which they get away with this, and I also can not believe the general lack of response from the political left.In this chapter, Moore takes on these distortions, with his typical gusto, in a way that is compelling and accessible, which I think is one of Moore's talents.Personally, I wish he had expanded "Why Doesn't GM Sell Crack?" to book length.Hopefully, that will be a project for another day. ... Read more

Isbn: 0060977337
Subjects:  1. 1993-2001    2. American wit and humor    3. General    4. Government - National    5. Humor    6. Politics and government    7. Social conditions    8. United States   

All too Human
by George Stephanopoulos
Average Customer Review:
Paperback (01 March, 2000)
list price: $14.95 -- our price: $10.17
(price subject to change: see help)
US | Canada | United Kingdom | Germany | France

Editorial Review

A Rhodes scholar with a healthy ego, the young idealist George Stephanopoulos thought he was ready for the obscure governor of Arkansas. But soon after he signed on as his presidential-campaign manager, the odds of Clinton's triumph soared, and so did the chance for calamity via Gennifer Flowers and other scandals. Stephanopoulos scrambled behind the scenes, squelching rumors, spinning major news organizations, artfully knifing Clinton rivals, and second-guessing public opinion--lessons that would serve him well when Clinton won.

For the next four years, Stephanopoulos was a few feet from the president, advising him on everything from Iraq and Waco to gays in the military and Paula Jones. More than any book yet--including Monica Lewinsky's--Stephanopoulos's memoir reveals what went on in the scary, occasionally hilarious world backstage at the White House. He casts stark light on characters from Yeltsin, "like a boiled potato slathered in sour cream," to the author's nemesis Dick Morris, whom he depicts bellowing for Clinton to bomb Bosnia. And nobody who's talking knows as well as Stephanopoulos the most passionate, mystifying affair of all, between Bill and Hillary.

But years of backroom scheming, screaming, and relentless political attacks took a toll. Stephanopoulos's face erupted in hives; he grew a beard. Slammed by clinical depression, he dangerously delayed medical attention, fearing the story might leak. This memoir could've been titled Prisoner of Spin. Written with the jittery cadence of a bookie, All Too Human is a lively look at the complex and motley cast of characters who rule the world. --Rebekah Warren ... Read more

Reviews (275)

A good look at the dynamics of being a presidential advisor
This book is filled with many events and their effects on the presidential staff of the Clinton administration in the first four years of his service as President. Stephanopoulos gives us an insider's view of how relationships are made and how advisors give counsel to the President. Stephanopoulos does not give any sort of analysis on why decisions were made. Unfortunately, there is a lot of scrambling by the staff and Stephanopoulos to cover the women who made allegations of extramarital affairs with Clinton. This book is definitely a page turner. The book also covers the presidential staff's tension with Dick Morris, who was more of a ridiculous character. The hiring of Morris made me wonder what was Clinton's true intentions. Was he wanting to be a popular president instead of trying to lead the people? Stephanopoulos gives some clues.

I am a democrat but wasn't a great fan of Clinton. It shows Clinton as having a nonchalant attitude to the efforts of his staff covering his shortcomings. Stephanopoulos definitely shows some of the unflattering images of Clinton but he keeps a somewhat balanced approach in this book. If you are looking for a political analysis of the Clinton administration, this is not your book. Stephanopoulos focuses more on the dynamics and relationships between the staff and the President.

The Best and the Brightest
This is a memoir full of lessons for everyone interested in the human side of politics. Bill Clinton and George Stephanopoulos formed an interesting and intelligent partnership for nearly all the eight years of the Clinton Administration (and the previous campaign.) I still can't figure out the reasons that made Stephanopoulos finally turn away from the man that gave him the greatest opportunity in his political life, even when he tries really hard to explain those reasons in "All Too Human" (in "My Life", Clinton says he didn't have a clue about George's dissapointment until he read this book.) May be Dick Morris (that brilliant and cynical mercenary) had a lot to do with it, and also Clinton's lack of emotional closeness with Stephanopoulos in the really difficult period between the elections of 1994 and the victory of 1996.

Be what it may, "All Too Human" is a highly readable political memoir. Stephanopoulos is a fine writer and has a sharp talent to comunicate feelings and images. That's the case of the fascinating encounter, for example, between him and Bob Woodward. One can see the "draculesque" atmosphere when the author met Woodward in his Washington house. Woodward was writing "The Agenda" then, and wanted to get information from Stephanopoulos. "The Agenda", unfairly it seems, resulted in accussations of leaking for Stephanopoulos and was one of the reasons for the beggining of the decline of his fortune in the Clinton White House. Imagine that: the rising and youngest star and the ultimate wolf of journalism in town meeting face to face. It's just captivating.

The best and the brightest of the Clinton era tells it all here. His is a story not to be forgotten. Beware: Politics in Washington is indeed the most fascinating, seductive and dangerous of games.

Read it. You'll end reading it again. Then read it one more time and after that watch some of "The West Wing" episodes. You'll find certain, how to put it?... Distance.

An Interesting Insiders Account
George Stephanopoulos' "All Too Human" is a very interesting insider's account of the Clinton Presidency.The amount of spin that goes on in today's public life is astounding.Spin has always been there to one extent or another, but the amount of time expended on it from both sides boggles the mind.

Stephanopoulos gives a good account of the more liberal side of the Clinton story.He is often too critical of the President assuming that any move to the political center was a sell out for the sake of polls and not inspired by conviction.Clinton was elected and for several years had preached the gospel of pragmatism; activist government through practical means. He was a prophet of moving the Democratic Party closer to the political center. Above all he wanted to get things done. His is an honest accounting of a flawed person with great potential, and the frustrations of what might have been. Growing up just across the Arkansas state line in Missouri, I watched Clinton's rise on the local news since the early 80s.His convictions are very real and his political skills are amazing.His goal is to make progress and get things done.

This is a really good read however.I couldn't put the book down.Balance it with other views of the Clinton White House, but definately include it if you want to see things from all sides. ... Read more

Isbn: 0316930164
Subjects:  1. 1961-    2. Biography    3. Biography & Autobiography    4. Biography / Autobiography    5. Biography/Autobiography    6. General    7. Historical - U.S.    8. Philosophers    9. Political    10. Presidents    11. Staff    12. Stephanopoulos, George,    13. United States    14. Biography & Autobiography / Philosophers   

Monica's Story
by Andrew Morton
Average Customer Review:
Mass Market Paperback (01 August, 1999)
list price: $6.99 -- our price: $6.99
(price subject to change: see help)
US | Canada | United Kingdom | Germany | France

Editorial Review

Though it's a legal document, the Starr Report, published in late 1998, reads like a racy novel about the most powerful man in the world, President Bill Clinton, and a young intern, Monica Lewinsky, who's portrayed as a spoiled Beverly Hills brat performing oral sex on the president while he talked to colleagues on the telephone.

Andrew Morton, the author of Diana: Her True Story, spent several months interviewing Lewinsky after the scandal broke; the result is Monica's Story, which asserts that the picture the Starr Report paints of Lewinsky is totally incorrect. Morton believes she and the president had an emotional, mutually satisfying relationship, which, if circumstances had been different, would probably have remained secret. Although he covers much of the same territory as the Starr Report, he adds details of conversations Lewinsky and Clinton had in an attempt to show the depth of the relationship. In chapters with titles like "Grunge, Granola, and Andy" and "Terror in Room 1012," he paints a portrait of a "child-woman" who is sexually liberated but also intelligent, loving, and well mannered. "[She] could be anybody's sister," he insists, "anybody's daughter."

The book is most interesting, however, in its descriptions of the political intrigue, lies, and deception resulting from Kenneth Starr's investigation. Leading the evil band is Linda Tripp, described as a black-hearted, shameless manipulator who betrayed Lewinsky and spurred the scandal for her own personal gain (she was planning to write a book about Clinton). He also examines the media's hatred for Lewinsky--particularly that of women writers who became obsessed with her weight and body shape. "Just as the O.J. Simpson trial exposed the racial fault line running through American society," he argues, "so the Monica Lewinsky saga has spotlighted the underlying misogyny that still permeates American life." Monica's Story is gripping stuff--porn, fantasy, farce, political commentary, and tragedy all rolled into one. --Dale Kneen, Amazon.co.uk ... Read more

Reviews (76)

Puritanical virtues alive and well, but the economy?
This book was quite dumb, and all that it does is emphasize how dumb people can be. If you're a Republican right-winger who's more interested in a president's, a man's, sexcapades than what he does with the economy, then read on by all means. This mindless book was made for you.

A Valuable Historical Document
This fine biography illuminates for us a portrait of a man who is the quintessential, literal embodiment of all the Democrat Party's morals, ethics, ideologies and standards -- along with the woman who does the same for all Democrat females.It is a valuable historical reference.Don't miss it.

Monica RULZ
Any woman in her early twenties, who has ever fallen in love with a man who is married and forbidden by conventional ethical and professional standards, will find empathy in this book.

Whatever side of truth or political scenario this book attempts to portray, I primarily read it as a romance and enjoyed it more than ever. The book's appeal lies in the dynamics of the affair between the young intern and the president, rather than any political truth-finding. Maybe, there are too many 'truths' out there, and who are we to judge which one is true. This is Monica's version, so why quibble about absolute realities?

The book certainly does a good job of revealing her a human figure rather than a man-hunting slut responsible for the impreachment of Clinton.

Why marvel Marie Antoinette and Josephine, and not Monica? I admire Monica Lewinsky as a person who enjoys poetry, loves life, watches her weight, experiments with men, and most of all braves what the world thinks of her. I really think people ought to stop thinking of her as a sex symbol.

Tragic as the love story's end is, Monica RULZ!!! ... Read more

Isbn: 0312973624
Subjects:  1. (Monica Samille),    2. 1946-    3. 1973-    4. Biography    5. Biography & Autobiography    6. Biography / Autobiography    7. Biography/Autobiography    8. Clinton, Bill,    9. Governmental investigations    10. Historical - U.S.    11. Lewinsky, Monica S    12. Political    13. Presidents    14. Staff    15. United States    16. Women    17. Clinton, Bill    18. Relations with women    19. Sexual behavior   

The AGENDA: INSIDE THE CLINTON WHITE HOUSE
by Bob Woodward
Average Customer Review:
Paperback (01 April, 1995)
list price: $6.99
US | Canada | United Kingdom | Germany | France

Editorial Review

A no-holds-barred look inside the Clinton White House during the first one hundred days of his presidency.What emerges is a portrait of a man hampered by his struggle to do the right thing. Despite the defeat of the health care initiative and the bungling first steps of a naive administration, Woodward uncovers the essential decency of the man from Hope. ... Read more

Reviews (14)

historical, but reads like throwaway journalism
For a book that will certainly serve as a primary source for presidential historians because of its insider reporting, this book is extremely disappointing and indeed superficial.You get a kind of blow by blow report of Clinton's tumultuous first year in the White House with virtually no analysis and context, but instead just raw description.I was appalled at how much trash was in it.

The one nugget I took away was that in that first year, Clinton spent too much time chatting with aides due to his "lack of discipline" and enjoyment of exercising his mind with the extraordinary grasp he had of policy.But there is no exploration of his character, and indeed ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about the details of the policies he was attempting to advance.As such, this book is like so much election journalism of today:covering the horse race but not the issues.

Not recommended, except for academics doing deep research.

The Agenda captures the essence
The Agenda written by Bob Woodward, pertains to Bill Clinton's first year in office. It's mostly about the battle and struggle for the new (at the time) president to get his budget and economic recovery package passed through Congress. It's amazing, but I never realized how much of a tough job it is to be president.

Shortly after winning the presidency in November of 1992 over incumbent President George Bush Clinton soon had to both come to grips and realize that his work was cut out a lot more for him, than he, or his campaign staff could've ever realized. Ultimately, he had to accept the fact that he would have to do some drastic compromising from his campaign promises. Clinton of course campaigned to be a "New Democrat" who would restore the economy to the forgotten middle-class and overturn the Reagan-Era greed of the 1980s, by investing in jobs, education, and health insurance reform. After meeting with Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan, he soon realized that it wouldn't be so easy. As it would turn out, taking bold action to reduce the overwhelmingnational deficit would become the top-notch priority of his economic recovery plan, and would hog up most of his budget. Therefore his beloved domestic investment agenda would have to be sacrificed. Including his promised tax-cut for the middle-class.

So even before, let alone after Clinton took the oath of office, Clinton had his work cut out for him. He had to realize
early that his approval ratings would sink miserably and there would be disenchantment among his strongest supporters, let alone the American people. In many ways, two camps developed in his White House. There were the fiscal conservatives such as Robert Rubin, Leon Panetta, David Gergan. Then there were those from his campaign staff who wanted him to continue with his campaign pledges of investment such as Paul Begala, George Stephanapolis, and James Carville.

Greenspan's influence over the new president was amazing. Although it was from a neutral point of view, Greenspan
made Clinton understand how it was crucial that Clinton tackle the deficit. Or else long-term interest rates would never come down and the economy would never take off. Without the economy taking off, no way would Clinton ever be able to get back to doing the things that he was elected to do, let alone re-elected in 1996. Clinton had to come to accept that he would have to sacrifice many things, among them, his political popularity, but know that the long term effects would pay off dividends for both him politically, and for the US economy.

Fortunately for him, it did apparently work out for the best, and he did (with the extreme help of a Republican Congress
balance the federal budget in 1997) reduce the deficit and gave us a budget surplus. What should also be strongly considered is that he did this, at the behest of cutting the DOD and the intelligence community, which contributes to events such as September 11th, 2001.

What is also amazing about this book, is that Woodward gives you a fly-on-the-wall view of the battle to pass this
budget through both the House and the Senate. It also gives you the word for word account of a bitter phone conversation between Clinton and Nebraska Democratic Senator Bob Kerry, in which Clinton tells Kerry to go f--- himself, when Kerry refuses to vote for his budget, which turned out to be the crucial vote.

As it would turn out, Kerry would vote for it, making it a tie. Gore then gave the over the top vote and the budget was
passed.

This book was very, very good, and that is why I was able to go through it so quickly.

-Nicholas J. Vertucci

Big Fan
Ok, I admit it; I am a big fan of Woodward.I will read everything he puts out and probably enjoy it.With that being said here is another book of his that I will profess to really enjoying.For my money he is the best political writer in the business today.He has so many contacts that many times in reading the book you could swear he has the White House bugged.This book follows the Clinton team through the first two years that they are in office.You get all the standard Woodward items with the book, great details, wonderful he said - she said conversations that really make you feel like a fly on the wall, an easy to follow and well laid out book.

I have read the book All Too Human that George Stephanopoulos wrote and in the book he describes the interviewing technique of Woodward, he stated that Woodward has a great style of getting you comfortable with him and then before you know it you are spilling all the secrets.What was also interesting is that Stephanopoulos wrote that Woodward audio tapes all of his interviews so that leads me to believe that the information in his books has not gone through a reporter taking notes loss of detail.One last bit of info is the Stephanopoulos said that once this book came out the Clinton's got so mad at George for all of the info he told Woodward that they basically shut him out for a year.That must mean Woodward got it right.

A great follow up to this book is the Elizabeth Drew book "Showdown: The Struggle between the Gingrich Congress and the Clinton White House", it picks up where The Agenda leaves off.This is an interesting book that I really enjoyed.IF you like Woodward you will like this book, if you are interested in the first two years of the Clinton presidency then this is also a good source of information. ... Read more

Isbn: 0671666843
Subjects:  1. 1946-    2. 1993-2001    3. Clinton, Bill,    4. Friends and associates    5. Government - U.S. Government    6. Politics - Current Events    7. Politics and government    8. Politics/International Relations    9. Presidents    10. Staff    11. United States    12. Clinton, Bill    13. Literary Criticism & Collections / General   

The Warren Commission Report : Report of the President's Commission on the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy
by President's Commission on the Assissination
Average Customer Review:
Paperback (15 February, 1992)
list price: $12.95 -- our price: $10.36
(price subject to change: see help)
US | Canada | United Kingdom | Germany | France

Reviews (13)

888 Pages Of Common Sense (IMHO)
The completed Warren Commission Report was delivered to President Lyndon B. Johnson on September 24, 1964. The seven-member Warren Commission worked for ten months, examining and investigating the events and circumstances surrounding the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, and reached the conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald, alone, had murdered the President and wounded Texas Governor John B. Connally.

The Commission also found no "credible evidence" to suggest that Oswald or Jack Ruby (the man who killed Oswald two days after JFK's death) were involved in any type of conspiratorial plot when each of them committed their individual acts of violence in November of 1963 in Dallas, Texas.

I, for one, am in complete agreement with the Commission's final conclusions regarding Oswald and Ruby. There is just too much evidence, in my opinion, supporting the idea that Lee Oswald took his own rifle to work with him on the morning of November 22nd, 1963 (wrapped in a brown paper bag), and that he constructed a makeshift "Sniper's Nest" on the sixth floor of his workplace at the Texas School Book Depository Building on Elm Street in Dallas' Dealey Plaza, and fired three shots at the passing Presidential motorcade below him at 12:30 PM, thereby ending the life of the 35th U.S. President.

Every single thing Lee Harvey Oswald did before and after 12:30 PM on November 22, 1963, spells "Guilt" (and more-than-likely "Lone Guilt" as well). ........

Such as:

1.) Oswald's bringing an (approx.) rifle-sized package to work with him on 11/22.

2.) "Send the elevator back up, guys." That was said by Oswald to fellow workers at about 11:45 or 11:50 AM on 11/22. And where was Oswald at the time he had the elevator "sent back up"? -- On the sixth floor, the "Death" floor.

3.) Thirty minutes after President Kennedy is shot, Oswald dashes into his small rented room on Beckley Avenue, grabs his revolver, very quickly exits the roominghouse, and starts walking again.

4.) Oswald shoots and kills Dallas city patrolman J.D. Tippit in cold blood near the intersection of 10th & Patton; then begins walking briskly once more away from the scene of yet another murder.

5.) Oswald is then seen by store employee Johnny Brewer at the entrance to Hardy's Shoe Store on Jefferson Boulevard. Brewer later testified that Oswald was acting in an odd and suspicious manner while at the shoe-store entrance, with his back toward the street, as various police vehicles (with sirens blaring) proceeded along Jefferson Boulevard. Once the police cars had gone by, Oswald then sneaks into the Texas Theater without paying.

6.) Pointed out by Brewer in the theater, Dallas police officers apprehend Oswald and are finally able to snap handcuffs on their suspect after a struggle. During this fight with police, Oswald pulls his revolver and tries to kill yet another officer, but (luckily) the gun misfired.

7.) Just prior to his altercation with police inside the movie theater, Oswald shouts "This is it" and/or "It's all over now". Those two phrases he supposedly uttered also spell (circumstantially) "Guilt" of some kind. What else would a rational person make out of the comment "It's all over now"?

8.) Oswald lies repeatedly to authorities after his arrest. Right down, of course, to telling an obvious falsehood in front of the TV cameras just one second before he uttered his much-heralded and probably-taken-way-out-of-context "I'm just a patsy" declaration.*

* = His "Patsy" remark was prefaced by a KNOWN lie -- "They've taken me in because of the fact that I've lived in the Soviet Union". Oswald knew full well this "Soviet Union" statement was untrue. He knew the true reason why the police had "taken him in" (on suspicion of killing a policeman). Why anyone would suddenly start BELIEVING him regarding the "Patsy" remark when it came on the heels of an OBVIOUS LIE is beyond my comprehension.

9.) And the biggest piece of evidence linking the shooting to Oswald, and only Oswald -- It was Oswald's OWN rifle found on the 6th Floor. This, naturally, doesn't PROVE he killed the President, but it's a darn good solid piece of circumstantial evidence. Logic dictates it was OWNER of said rifle on 6th Floor who PROBABLY used it on November 22nd. Odds are that JFK's killer WAS Oswald (just based on ownership of the murder weapon alone).**

** = To believe otherwise on this point is to believe in the odd notion that Oswald (for whatever idiotic reason) just handed over his OWN, traceable weapon to some other killers for the purpose of either murdering John Kennedy, or for some other unknown reason we could only guess at. Not logical, IMO. .... Or -- If LHO was "Just a patsy", you'll have to necessarily believe that the plotters were somehow able to steal Oswald's rifle without him ever knowing (or without the Paines or Marina Oswald ever suspecting the theft from the known rifle storage location of Ruth Paine's garage).

Another very good indication that Oswald was performing a 'solo' murder act on November 22nd is the fact that he was forced to WALK, RUN, & CHASE DOWN CABS AND BUSSES after leaving the Depository. If Oswald was part of a "killing team" of some sort, he certainly would have arranged for a RIDE away from the scene of the crime.

And then there's also Oswald's rather flimsy excuse for why he left his workplace at 12:33 PM on Friday, with the work day only HALF completed. He could not possibly have been certain (at 12:33 PM, a mere THREE MINUTES after the shooting took place) that all TSBD employees would be sent home for the day due to the assassination, which is the reason he gave to the police for leaving work when he did.

Nor could he have simply ASSUMED at that time, just 3 minutes after a shooting that LHO had (supposedly) NO details about, that HIS OWN WORKPLACE was somehow involved in said shooting. Mrs. Robert A. Reid, a Depository employee who encountered Oswald on the 2nd Floor of the building just after the shooting (and who also mentioned to Oswald that the President had just been shot), didn't specifically say to Oswald during this brief chance meeting -- "The President has been shot FROM THIS BUILDING! We'd better get out, Lee!"

The more one examines Oswald's specific actions (and the reasons he gave to explain them), the more he rises to the level of a GUILTY party in the crime just committed on Elm Street.

Because -- WHY would Oswald just naturally ASSUME that "there would be no more work today" IF he didn't ALREADY KNOW that something had occurred re. the assassination attempt FROM HIS VERY OWN WORKPLACE?

Was this just an amazingly-astute "premonition" on Oswald's part? He somehow KNOWS for certain, a mere 180 seconds after the shooting, that he's going to be sprung for the day by his boss? (I somehow doubt that.)

That comment/excuse used by Oswald, plus his ultra-calm manner when confronted by Police Officer Baker in the lunch room, in my view, indicates that Oswald ALREADY KNEW that the Depository was the source of the shots (and just TWO MINUTES after the last gunshot was fired!). And the reason he already knew is because it was he, himself, who squeezed off those three rifle shots from the 6th Floor.

----------------------

To summarize............

The Warren Report isn't a perfect document. I don't think anyone has ever said it was "perfect" (even among avid "Lone Assassin" believers). But on the whole, and considering the totality of all the evidence, the "Lone Assassin" conclusions purported by the seven members of the Warren Commission were correct conclusions (IMO), and still hold up today (despite innumerable attempts by conspiracists to discredit the work of the WC).

But, given that no "smoking guns" or credible "confessions", etc., have been unearthed by the many JFK researchers in the several decades since the Warren Report was published in 1964, it begins to look more and more like the Warren boys GOT IT RIGHT after all--- One assassin (Oswald); Three shots; No fancy conspiracy plots.

Most exhaustive investigation ever done by the US Goverment.
The Warren Commission Report was the result of the total investigations on the assassination of President Kenedey as conducted by the United States Secret Service, the Justice Department, the CIA andFBI, and the Dallas police Department which also investigated the deaths of a Dallas police officer and the shooting death of Lee Oswald by Jack Ruby, in direct connecttion with the death of the President. The findings were based on both the investigations done by the above mentioned agencies and the testimoney of both the invesigators and eye witnesses that were present at the time of the shootings.The Commission's final report was based on all of the above mentioned factors as well as the events in Lee Oswald's life that the Comission uncovered as they began taking the testimoney.The data that this reportwent by was as good as was possible in 1963.No evidence of a larger conspriacy was found.It is also unlikely that if such a large group of people were involved in such a plan, that someone along the way would have discovered it and exposed it to the public (as was the case with Watergate and the Pentagon Papers).No later invesigators were able to prove that the Mob or the Cubans were involved.The conpriacy theories have never produced any hard evidence that seriously contradicts the Warren Commission Report. NONE AT ALL.This report is the final verdict of history of what happened on that terrible day in Dallas in 1963. Lee Oswald acted alone

Was there a conspiracy? (40th Anniversary review)
The Warren Report is the basic starting point for anybody who is even remotely interested in researching the JFK assassination. The book is massive - nearly 2 inches thick, 9 inches in length and 6 inches in width and clocks in at 888 pages. There are many illustrations and photographs to help break the monotony and they are helpful in understanding the text.

Be forewarned. This report is not to be taken at face value. It promotes itself while at the same time laying blame on everybody from Oswald to the Secret Service and the Dallas County Police. You have every right to be critical of this book because of its omissions. One of the most important pieces of evidence - the autopsy photographs - have been completely omitted. Not because they would serve as only disturbing the American people and the Kennedy family but because they where deliberately HOAXED when revealed to the public through the media. There is no excuse for providing the American people with autopsy photographs of another dead man who was not President Kennedy. The original autopsy photographs have since come to light and these shed new information on the case. The report does not even touch on that topic. These photographs alone should warrant deep consideration by the even the most hardened lone-gunman supporters. How can the Warren Report expound on the wrongness of the Dallas Police revealing inaccurate case information when itself is staying shut-mouthed on the deliberately hoaxed autopsy photographs? This kind of hypocrisy is mind shattering and only serves to drive home the most important item of interest of the whole affair - that the US government is knowingly and deliberately hiding evidence and information to protect some interest. You must read more elsewhere to learn the full facts of the case and the other host of omissions that where deliberately kept aside from this report.

The warren commission report starts with its summary and conclusions - that Oswald acted alone in killing President Kennedy and that there was no conspiracy. It then gives a brief synopsis of the assassination and the circumstances surrounding the events on November 22nd 1963. The report continues by developing the scenario in the Texas School Book Depository including the evidence gained from witnesses at the scene and the recovery of the riffle, spent shells and prints. Connections are established between Oswald and the riffle and the School Book Depository building before moving on to the motive and Oswalds background.

The report then deals with Oswalds detention, the media, Oswalds murder and his assassin - Jack Ruby. The next chapter deals with investigating a possible conspiracy before laying out Oswalds background in detail. Next up the Warren report deals with the protection of the President and concludes the entire events on page 468. The remainder of the book goes in-depth with expert witness testimony with several recommendations and more background on Oswald.

In the end you are left feeling that Oswald was involved in the assassination one way or another and certainly the slaying of Officer J.D Tippit by Oswald is the clincher. The murder of patrolman Tippit is a key event which shows that Oswald was capable of murder and was also on a killing frenzy at the time of the assassination. He also tried to shoot officers when he was apprehended in the film theatre. Did Oswald shoot President Kennedy? Probably Yes. Could the Magic bullet theory work? It is possible. Did Jack Ruby kill Oswald on the spur of the moment? The facts surrounding this are vague. Did Oswald act alone? It is possible but unlikely. Does the Warren report do justice for the American people and the people of the world? Absolutely not. Does the Warren report deliberately neglect important and relevant information? Absolutely. Would an impartial jury convict Oswald on the assassination of President Kennedy based on the evidence? Probably not because there is too much doubt at large to deal with. Would an impartial jury convict Oswald of the murder J.D Tippit? Yes. Is there a cover-up and if so why?

The truth is that there is probably a cover-up involved and the Warren report as it stands today is absolute proof that the US government at the time was knee-deep in a conspiracy of some kind simply based on its omissions and neglect to deal with highly important and relevant evidence. Was there a government conspiracy to assassinate the President? Probably not, but there was a cover-up of a conspiracy of some kind and this is what is at the heart of the whole assassination and the follow up events including this report. A blind eye has probably been turned to the truth surrounding the assassination because President Kennedy was considered an obstacle to many important people. In fact the Warren Commission report has all the hallmarks of a new administration that just wants to sweep everything under the carpet.

All in all this is a five star book, not because of the quality of the report, but because its contents when compared to what we now know only serve as a reminder that even the administrators of what is supposed to be a leading democratic and free nation can act in such a wreckful and manipulative manner.

In short Oswald was definitely firing shots from the Dallas School Book Depository building. He owned the gun that shot at the president. He murdered a police officer and tried to kill more. He also tried to assassinate Maj. Gen. Edwin A. Walker but failed. The chances that Oswald was the only one firing shots at President Kennedy that fateful day in Dallas are slim. When you add an extra shooter the whole thing falls into place. To quote Occams Razor - When explaining a thing, no more assumptions should be made than are necessary.

Magic Bullet vs more than one assassin? -The extra assassin is simply the more logical conclusion easily. ... Read more

Isbn: 0312082576
Sales Rank: 97470
Subjects:  1. (John Fitzgerald),    2. 1917-1963    3. Assassination    4. General    5. History - General History    6. History: American    7. Kennedy, John F.    8. Kennedy, John F.,    9. Oswald, Lee Harvey    10. President U.S.    11. United States - 20th Century/60s    12. History / United States / 20th Century   

If the Gods Had Meant Us to Vote, They'd Have Given Us Candidates
by Jim Hightower
Average Customer Review:
Paperback (19 February, 2001)
list price: $14.00 -- our price: $14.00
(price subject to change: see help)
US | Canada | United Kingdom | Germany | France

Editorial Review

Liberal populist Jim Hightower has a knack for naming books; before If the Gods Had Meant Us to Vote... came There's Nothing in the Middle of the Road but Yellow Stripes and Dead Armadillos. Even the chapter titles of the current volume reveal Hightower's way with words as well as they underscore his themes: "Some Say We Need a Third Party, I Wish We Had a Second One" and "Plutocracy Is Not Government by a Far-Off Planet." Hightower speaks for angry, disaffected Americans who view both Democrats and Republicans as sleazy money-grubbers who do the bidding of wealthy multinational corporations. He is one of the sharpest voices on the Left, and also a very funny one. Even right-wingers will find themselves laughing at some of his jokes, and the Pat Buchanan set may see a few points of agreement. Ultimately, though, If the Gods Had Meant Us to Vote... isn't a book for conservatives, but for liberals who feel that not even the Democratic Party can represent them in the era of Bill Clinton and Al Gore. Hightower's enthusiasm is contagious: "Hey, let's gut it up, decamp from Washington, put our resources in the countryside, slug the corporate bastards right in the snout, and get it on with a grassroots politics that gives regular folks a reason to be excited and get involved." Readers already inclined toward these views will be eager to join Hightower's crusade by the time they finish his energetic book. --John J. Miller ... Read more

Reviews (36)

Outspoken Populism from a Disgusted Texan
Jim Hightower is a man with a mission. He is disgusted with the two- party system and he was repulsed by the choices presented by the two major parties in the 2000 elections, Bush and Gore. He is tired of watching politicians at all levels sell themselves out for corporate cash. He wrote this book as a guide to the corruption that exists in politics and what you and I can do to stop it.

Hightower was once an elected official himself, so he is experienced with the world of politics and how it operates. In this book, he explains how different the parties of today are compared to those of the past- particularly Democrats, whom Hightower feels could be counted on in the past to support populist causes but who no longer seem to care about anything but money. He talks about the problem of campaign financing and the need for reform. He shows how groups like the World Trade Organization and NAFTA have damaged the economy of the United States by favoring a few large corporations to the detriment of the common man.

I like Hightower's outspoken style and his demand to return to a government of self- rule for the people. However, there are a few instances in the book where he seems to get a little off- track when he delivers his populist message. For one thing, Hightower seems to have a strong and undeniable envy toward anyone with more money than himself, and he seems to think that all rich people are wicked and deserving of punishment. He seems to think the same of most corporations, even though a large percentage of companies are good corporate citizens. Some of his economic analysis is also a little shady, as he attempts to define how the economy can and should function to better ensure that the underprivileged are properly taken care of.

Hightower uses humor throughout this book to help hold his audience and keep them interested in reading more. He doesn't go over the line, like some other political authors are known to do. Hightower does take stabs at specific individuals, but he manages to keep things on a civil level, without getting too nasty or too personal.

With the types of candidates that the Dems and Repubs have been nominating lately, it's not surprising that so many voters are becoming disillusioned with the American political process. Jim Hightower is one of these people who is fed up, and he makes his views known in this book. "If the Gods had Meant us to Vote" is not a perfect volume of political analysis. But it does contain some useful information and some funny lines from Jim Hightower, America's most popular populist.

Hysterically funny but should be taken seriously
This is a book everyone should read. With an incredibly sharp wit, Hightower shows just how undemocratic our "democracy" has become and how much of our lives are dictated by corporate America. The chapter on globalization is a must read. Even though it was written before Bush was elected in 2000, everything he writes is still relevant, even more so.

I'm giving out copies to my family and friends
I had never heard of Jim Hightower before reading this book.I wasn't even sure I was going to like it.To be honest, I didn't even know what a populist was.Well, all of that changed.I learned so much from this book.Hightower writes in an entertaining, straight-shooting manner.He isn't afraid to attack any of the wrong-doing politicians out there---no matter what side of the fence they stand on.I am a senior year business major at a major university and learned more about the reality of big corporations from Jim Hightower's book than I have in the whole 5 years I have been at my college.I like this book so much, I have already decided to give copies out to my family and friends.Read it for an educational good time. ... Read more

Isbn: 0060932090
Subjects:  1. 1993-2001    2. 2000    3. American wit and humor    4. Election    5. General    6. Humor    7. Political Science    8. Politics and government    9. Politics/International Relations    10. Presidential candidates    11. Presidents    12. Topic - Political    13. United States    14. Political Science / General   

Shrub : The Short but Happy Political Life of George W. Bush
by MOLLY IVINS, LOU DUBOSE
Average Customer Review:
Paperback (10 October, 2000)
list price: $11.00 -- our price: $8.80
(price subject to change: see help)
US | Canada | United Kingdom | Germany | France

Editorial Review

"Youthful political reporters are always told there are three ways to judge a politician," write Molly Ivins and Lou Dubose in Shrub. "The first is to look at the record. The second is to look at the record. And third, look at the record." The record under scrutiny in this brief, informative book belongs to one George W. Bush--dubbed "Shrub" by Ivins--governor of Texas and 2000 presidential hopeful. These two veteran journalists know how politics are played in Texas and they've done their homework, writing a comprehensive examination of Bush's professional and political life that's a lively read, to boot. And if the title alone doesn't convey their particular slant, perhaps the following caveat from the introduction will: "If, at the end of this short book, you find W. Bush's political résumé a little light, don't blame us. There's really not much there. We have been looking for six years."

Beginning with his admission to the Texas National Guard during the Vietnam War (where he bypassed a waiting list of about 100,000), the authors go on to deconstruct his losing congressional bid, his failed career as an oil executive, and his role as managing partner of the Texas Rangers baseball team, revealing how he was helped every step of the way by wealthy and influential friends of the family. Ever popular, Dubya has always been good at rounding up powerful players to bankroll a variety of ventures, including political campaigns. For this reason, explain the authors, along with his lineage and social status, Bush's primary allegiance is to the business community. While his speeches may deal with the "entertainment issues" of "God, guns, and gays," Bush is a "wholly owned subsidiary of corporate America," they write. They further point out that Texas ranks near the bottom of the nation in terms of a number of social categories, such as poverty, health insurance for children, and pollution, spearing the governor for his less-than-compassionate conservatism.

Shrub is not a complete Bush whacking, though. The authors laud the governor's record on education, in which he has managed to raise standards, push local control of schools, and launch a successful reading campaign. They also cite his wooing of the Hispanic vote and his ability to bridge the gap between the Christian right and the economic conservatives within the Republican party as evidence of true political acumen, though they maintain he lacks a penchant for actual governing: "From the record, it appears that he doesn't know much, doesn't do much and doesn't care much about governing." Bush has admitted that he dislikes reading, particularly about policy issues, and that he hates meetings and briefings, causing the authors to wonder, "The puzzle of Bush is why someone with so little interest in or attention for policy, for making government work, would want the job of president, or even governor."

Love him or leave him, Shrub leaves much to consider about the man who would be president. And it can be read in about a day. --Shawn Carkonen ... Read more

Reviews (132)

Should Have Been Called "When Nice Guys do Awful Things."
What I appreciate most about Molly Ivins and Lou Dubose is their concentration on the actions of George W. Bush rather than his supposed character.They make it clear that Bush is an amicable, likable rascal, but they make it equally clear that what really matters about Bush is his effect on his electorate through his policy-making (and also his behavior before he moved into the world of politics).They home in on Bush's pet issues and then demonstrate the effects of his policies in those areas.

The book is written in an editorial style and thus should not be treated as an academic or objective work of political analysis.Ivins' and Dubose's political leanings are relatively transparent, but getting angry with them for that is about the same as getting mad at Anne Coulter for being conservative.With all books of this type, you assume the author is biased and is writing for a specific market.However, this does not mean that Shrub should be disregarded.A little digging into the record of George W., and you'll have the "proof" you've been seeking.In the age of computers, it isn't that hard to find a reference article or two about virtually all of the claims made by Ivins and Dubose.That being said, it would have been nice if the authors had thought to include a bibliography.

References and footnotes aside though, this book is loaded with solid examples of how Bush's allegiances and preferences affect and inform his policies, and how those policies translate into real-world results.Their assessments of Bush's policies are not unreasonable given the results they have wrought.

Required Reading, Especially in the Red States
I read this book years ago and was highly impressed by the facts assembled and the support in which those facts were grounded.

"Thank heavens Molly Ivins is here to reveal to the American people what a mediocre, bungling, occasionally mean-spirited, non-entity George Bush is," I thought while reading this book.

"Molly has done the background work so that we don't ever make the mistake of giving George Bush so much power that he can cause trouble on a national, heaven forfend, on an international scale."

Well, I write these words a few days after the presidential election of 2004.

This much is true -- Molly Ivins has written a good book. She did give us the salient facts, she does present them in a brisk, humorous and pithy way, and she does put solid support behind everything she says.

In other words, it's not Molly Ivins' fault.

Anyway, it's not too late to read this book, and, along with other books by folks like Richard Clarke, Joseph Wilson, and Paul O'Neill / Ron Suskind, I recommend that you do. Especially if you live in a red state. As the evangelical pastors say, it's never too late to repent, no matter how much damage you've done.

Partisan tripe of the worst kind
The sheer disgust I felt while reading this worthless waste of paper and ink is indescribable. Molly Ivins and Lou Dubose ramble on and on with charges and accusations with absolutely no credible sources or facts to back their claims, with no purpose other than to tarnish the reputation of a man rising to greatness. This book was a complete and utter waste of time, giving a bad name to honest, unbiased documentarians everywhere. Obviously charged with blatant partisanship, I hate that I wasted money and time purchasing it. ... Read more

Isbn: 0375757147
Subjects:  1. (George Walker),    2. 1946-    3. Biography    4. Biography & Autobiography    5. Biography / Autobiography    6. Biography/Autobiography    7. Bush, George W    8. Children of presidents    9. General    10. Governors    11. Political    12. Presidential candidates    13. Texas    14. United States    15. Current Events / Political   

The Government Racket: 2000 And Beyond
by Martin L. Gross
Average Customer Review:
Paperback (09 January, 2001)
list price: $14.00
US | Canada | United Kingdom | Germany | France

Reviews (1)

Government robbery
I read a book in three hours. If you want to see how US democracy works read this book. You'll probably see that our democracy rates extremly low, although apolitic as American people are we may think that we're the greatest democratic society in the world. Well, this book will prove we're not and not only that, it'll show us how an average american citizen CANNOT do anything about our government robbing us. ... Read more

Isbn: 0060933941
Sales Rank: 468603
Subjects:  1. 1993-2001    2. Economic policy    3. General    4. Political Process - General    5. Political Science    6. Politics - Current Events    7. Politics and government    8. Politics/International Relations    9. Practical Politics    10. United States    11. Waste in government spending