Bob Cobb's Dittohead Bartender's Guide
by Bob Cobb
Average Customer Review:
Paperback (01 January, 2001)
list price: $15.95 -- our price: $15.95
(price subject to change: see help)
US | Canada | United Kingdom | Germany | France

Reviews (17)

can't wait for the updated edition!
Now that so many more ingredients are kosher for a dittohead cocktail, I can't wait to see what new concoctions BC comes up with! Just remember: too many cocktails may affect your hearing!

Drunken Dittoheads
Hypocrisy is easier to swallow when you're drunk, eh?

A dittohead treasure!
Only Rush Limbaugh's own books can approach the value of "Bob Cobb's Dittohead Bar Guide" for those who love the Rush Limbaugh show.This is a clever and original book filled with a number of humerous passages.I personally like the "adult beverage" on the book's cover - Jocelyn's Jazzy Juice.The drink is "garnished with a free government hand-out condom"!If you like Rush Limbaugh, I challenge you to read this book without laughing out loud.A sure keeper for your book collection! ... Read more

Isbn: 0595171087
Sales Rank: 1594435
Subjects:  1. Beverages - Bartending    2. Cooking / Wine    3. Humor    4. Topic - Political    5. Political satire, American    6. Current Events    7. Political   

The O'Reilly Factor: The Good, the Bad, and the Completely Ridiculous in American Life
by BILL O'REILLY
Average Customer Review:
Hardcover (12 September, 2000)
list price: $23.00 -- our price: $23.00
(price subject to change: see help)
US | Canada | United Kingdom | Germany | France

Editorial Review

The O'Reilly Factor isn't just the name of Bill O'Reilly's popular talk show on the Fox News Channel anymore--it's also the title of his book, which, appropriately enough, actually reads like a TV show. The narrative rarely proceeds for more than a few paragraphs before a bold-faced "This Just In" or "Bulletin" pops up on the page and breaks the stream of thought--sort of like a commercial interruption. This provides an ideal forum for O'Reilly to sound off on any number of topics with lots of verve but not too much depth. There are breezy chapters here on money, media, religion, race, and sex, among others. O'Reilly dislikes many things, and he isn't shy about sharing his opinions: "SUVs should be immediately outlawed," he rants. Here's O'Reilly on President Clinton: "What a ridiculous waste!" Attorney General Janet Reno is a "ridiculous, incompetent woman" and President Clinton's "primary 'enabler.'"

This is not a subtle book, and its bombastic approach would be even more grating if it weren't for several flashes of self-deprecation, such as when the author shares a negative piece of viewer mail, or when he writes, "In case you haven't noticed, I'm a cocky bastard." Sometimes O'Reilly's put-downs are creative and funny: "If God has a sense of humor, as I believe he does, [Al Sharpton and David Duke] will be sharing a sauna in the netherworld. With one thermostat." And he's good at illustrating his points with outrageous details. In criticizing the bloated federal budget, for instance, he points to these shockers: $230,000 for a study of housefly sex habits, $27,000 for an analysis of why prisoners want to escape, and $100,000 to find out why Americans don't like beets. (To which he replies: "Houseflies mate when no one is looking. Prisoners don't like prison. Beets don't taste good.") O'Reilly is often considered something of a conservative, but he can also play the blue-collar populist: "The rich want us to believe that anyone can make the quantum leap from bowling league to country club by just working a little harder. That's supposed to keep us motivated and quiet." Fans of his TV show will probably appreciate this cantankerous book. --John J. Miller ... Read more

Reviews (371)

An Outright Fraud
I have to admit to being a little let down. After reading the lawsuit filed against O'Reilly at the Smoking Gun in which it is claimed O'Reilly subjected his co-worker to repeated instances of sexual harassment and spoke often, and explicitly, to her about phone sex, vibrators, threesomes, masturbation, the loss of his virginity, and sexual fantasies. Knowing of O'Reilly's tastes I was willing to shuck out a few dollars for his take on the "completely ridiculous in American life"...unfortunately all I got was this smug litany of the usual right wing gripes with the usual disregard for context and proportion. Indeed I say this book is an outright fraud since Bill apparently had more interesting stories to tell than this pious hokum.

Very Prescient
Bill offers his opinion on everything from drugs, to sex, to religion. He always backs up his opinions with facts or ridiculous stories. For example, Mayor Willie Brown of San Francisco wanted to give credit card readers to bums so people could give money to them in that way rather than just throwing coins into their cups!
The ridiculous chapter is dead on, identifying Bill Clinton, Janet Reno, Rosie O'Donnell, Al Sharpton, skin piercing, cliches, and the tax code as such. The bad chapter also hits the nail on the head. It says that SUV's, Roseanne, Warren Beatty, abortion, Barbara Streisand, phone solicitors, Ted Kennedy, tattoos, Michael and Jesse Jackson, Martha Stewart, and Johnnie Cochran as detrimental to this country. This book was written in 2000, Bill must have known something that we didn't, because since then, Clinton admitted to knowingly giving false testimony under oath, Reno lost the democratic primary for Florida governor, Sharpton lost the 2004 democratic primary for President (and a whole lot of other elections) we now have a do not call list, we've had two major tax cuts, Michael Jackson will likely go to prison, Jesse Jackson (a reverend) admitted to fathering a daughter out of wedlock, Stewart went to jail for lying to investigators, and Cochran is six feet under.
The good chapter correctly names positive influences on our nation, like Bill Cosby, Bill Murray, Mike Meyers, Charlton Heston, Clint Eastwood, and The Wizard of Oz as bright spots in our culture.
In conclusion, read this book. It will change your outlook on things if you read with an open mind. Some think Bill is conservative, if you read the book, you will find otherwise.

BUY THIS BOOK--USED
It beats having your drunken, loudmouth uncle over for dinner, or having to listen to the blowhard sitting at the end of the bar.When you are sick of it simply throw it away.But, for God's sake buy it used, you don't want to encourage Bill to write another one. ... Read more

Isbn: 0767905288
Subjects:  1. 1980-    2. 1989-    3. 1993-2001    4. Government - U.S. Government    5. Political    6. Political Process - General    7. Political Process - Political Parties    8. Political Science    9. Politics - Current Events    10. Politics and government    11. Politics/International Relations    12. Social conditions    13. U.S. - Contemporary Politics    14. U.S. History - 1990s    15. United States    16. Current Events / Political   

The Ten Things You Can't Say in America
by Larry Elder
Average Customer Review:
Hardcover (11 September, 2000)
list price: $23.95 -- our price: $16.77
(price subject to change: see help)
US | Canada | United Kingdom | Germany | France

Editorial Review

When Larry Elder talks, sparks fly, and he likes it that way. Fans of the radio talk-show host from Los Angeles, who call themselves Elderados, have dubbed him "the sage from South Central." His critics--and there are many--use names that range from Oreo to the Antichrist. What's it all about? Elder, a libertarian, lays down his controversial views in his first book, which attacks the politically correct, black leaders, feminists, gun-control advocates, and other "so-called liberals." Some of the 10 things you can't say in America include "Blacks are more racist than whites," "There's only a dime's worth of difference between Republicans and Democrats," "The media bias is real, widespread and destructive," and "America's greatest problem is illegitimacy." Elder aims to change the way blacks look at their future, demanding that they take responsibility for their lives, stop blaming all their problems on racism, and pay attention to the progress they've made. While there may be some truth in what he says and even some good news (for instance, the self-esteem of black children is equal to or better than that of whites), this isn't exactly a pep talk. Not surprisingly, his all-out attack on black leaders (whom he calls nutcases and hysterical) and white liberals has engendered a fair amount of hostility. With this kind of dialogue, it's hard to believe Elder's going to win too many converts. But for those who appreciate his views, or are curious about them, this book is a provocative and lively ride into the mind of one of the nation's most outspoken black libertarians. --Lesley Reed ... Read more

Reviews (187)

A Powerful book by a powerful writer

The book is very well written and talks about the nations main issues, such as gun control, poverty and racism. The author is a very skilled writer, which has a very good and healthy opinion on the laws and bigger issues in America. For instance he talks about gun control, and the fact that it is a setback for the casual good citizen, and it is only making it easier for the "bad guys", because you as a citizen, are regulated by those laws, the assailants are not. It also talks about the poverty, and how people deal with it, only to make it worse, for the help that government offers is only creating more problems. There are also many, many statistics along the text, and a few pages of graphs at the end of the book, that support his statements. Larry Elder also states, "When the media like you, they see no evil, hear no evil, write no evil" and talks about the media throughout the whole book, saying that the media is deceiving more than revealing, but like most things he isn't saying that all the media do it all the time, simply that there are times that you have to trust your intuition more than other peoples ideas.Larry also talks a lot about the racism, and the cliché of it, that a lot southerners and whites are racist, and that a lot of black people are oppressed by the whites, he states that it happens but not as much as it is talked about it, and that black people are also racist, and the fact that the make prejudice of white people being racist makes them sort of racist too. This book is very interesting to read, and I would recommend it to any reader interested about the main issues in our government, the issues that are talked about over kitchen table and shop floors.

Elder for President !!!
In an interview on National Public Radio, Ralph Nader once said that the only difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is the speed with which their knees hit the ground when the corporations come knocking. And while Larry Elder's views about the current state of American politics are nothing like those of Ralph Nader, a similar disillusionment with the two party system of America is what propels this book forward.

If you, like me, feel that the Democrats and Republicans are growing a lot of like each other, then this book is for you. In trying to distinguish themselves more on fringe issues such as aboriton and gay marriage while important issues such as the future of education and the reform of the convoluted tax system get left by the wayside, the two party system has failed America now like never before.

A proponent of low taxes and the abolition of social security, affirmative action and an inefficient public school system, Larry Elder is a brave and fearless crusader of capitalism who exhorts us to place our trust not in big government but in the self regulating, self correcting system of capitalism and free markets.

In today's world of special interest politics, Larry Elder is one of the few voices of reason and truth we have left. In the middle of this noisy debate about how to reform the social security system, it is heartening to see a voice of reason that steps up to ask if this is the government's business at all and how this attempt at making the "bad rich" pay for the "deserving poor" is any different from the communism we fought so hard to topple.

In one passage Elder pulls the legs of the politicians who keep harping on the growing gap between the rich and the poor in America. What, he asks, is an appropriate gap? Is this for the government to decide?

Elder's persuasive passages against affirmative action and welfare are substantiated with compelling statistics to convince us about the lack of accountability and the culture of entitlement that has been created bythese systems. I found myself nodding in violent agreement as I read these portions. Here is a man who calls a spade a spade. Hats off to him!

Previously I called myself a moderate Republican with some hesitation because I always felt I was settling for that category simply because it was not as bad as the others. In reading Larry's book, I have found my political self. I am a libertarian.

Name Calling and Condescension Turned Me Off
I had never heard of Larry Elder but the title of this book intrigued me enough to buy it.I thought I was going to be reading an interesting view of race relations in America, and I was right - for the first chapter or two. I enjoyed his perspective on racism even if I didn't always agree with it.

But once he strayed from that topic and into his own narrow political platform, I gave up reading the book and listed it for sale here on Amazon's site.You know, I profess to not knowing too much about the libertarian platform, but Elder's condescending tone didn't make want to learn from him. And truthfully, he sounded like a dyed-in-the-wool conservative to me. I was especially dismayed that he resorted to name-calling: calling liberals "toe-tag liberals."Well, this liberal gave up.

There's a part of me that wonders what Elder might say about his stated liberal-biased media now, four years since this book was published.Perhaps it's something he talks about on his radio show, but again, I couldn't care less to tune in and find out after starting to read this book.

I suppose if I kept reading his other chapters I would've found some more interesting bits. But I'd much rather learn about differing viewpoints from people who don't talk down to me and call me names.
... Read more

Isbn: 031226660X
Subjects:  1. 1980-    2. 1993-    3. American    4. Americana    5. Current Affairs    6. Political correctness    7. Politics - Current Events    8. Politics/International Relations    9. Public Policy - Social Policy    10. Social Policy    11. Social Situations And Conditions    12. Social conditions    13. Social problems    14. United States    15. Political Science / Civil Rights   

Drudge Manifesto
by Matt Drudge, Julia Phillips
Average Customer Review:
Hardcover (October, 2000)
list price: $22.95
US | Canada | United Kingdom | Germany | France

Editorial Review

Working from a small apartment in Hollywood, Matt Drudge became one of the country's most notorious journalists when he reported that Newsweek had spiked a story about a sexual relationship between President Clinton and a certain White House intern. Of course, there are many (mostly professional reporters) who argue that Drudge should not be labeled a journalist at all, and it is upon this issue that the Drudge Manifesto is based. As Drudge notes, he has "no budget, no bosses, no deadline," and as a result of this independence he is both feared and reviled, admired and respected. Ostracized by the establishment he may be, but his popular appeal is undeniable: the Drudge Report Web site received over 240 million hits in 1999, and the numbers are rising. Members of the White House staff check in daily, as do many of the media elite who viciously denounce Drudge in public. Like it or not, he has become a force in Internet journalism.

Drudge collaborated with Julia "You'll Never Eat Lunch in This Town Again" Phillips to produce a writing style that reads like a breathless and often disjointed e-mail. But the book is a vehicle for ideas, not sparkling prose, and its value lies in Drudge's assessment of the current state of the media as well as his take on its future. One of the most interesting (and certainly the clearest) parts is a transcript of a Q&A session conducted at the National Press Club on June 2, 1998, which lays out Drudge's manifesto better than the book itself. The NPC is hostile territory for Drudge, and, unsurprisingly, he is grilled by moderator Doug Harbrecht. In the end, Drudge makes a strong and thoughtful case for his methods and his right to be a reporter. And he gets in plenty of zingers of his own: "You know, these questions are pretty tough, and I think if you directed this type of tough questioning to the White House, there'd be no need for someone like me, quite frankly."

This is also a chance for Drudge to sound off. He boasts of beating CNN (by eight minutes) to the announcement of Princess Diana's death; of being the first to report Bob Dole's selection of Jack Kemp as his running mate; of his scoop of the Microsoft-NBC merger. He replays the events surrounding his decision to release the Lewinsky information on January 17, 1998 (the book is dedicated to Linda R. Tripp), and volunteers his favorite Web sites and sources. His book is not only a manifesto but a manual for anyone interested in following his lead. "With a modem, a phone jack, and an inexpensive computer, your newsroom can be your living room, your bedroom... your bathroom, if you're so inclined," he writes. In today's media climate, that's the way it is. --Shawn Carkonen ... Read more

Reviews (119)

One Of The Worst Books I Ever Read
Matt Drudge will be remembered for the role he played in popularizing the revolution brought about by the advent of Internet news.However, when it comes to the world of publishing, he better not quit his day job.

As one of the pioneers of a new form of mass communication, one would expect Drudge Manifesto to be an insightful tome as to his medium's possibilities and strategies on how others might replicate his success.However, on this count Drudge Manifesto falls as short as the New York Times in fulfilling its civic obligation of supplying useful information.

The reader comes away from Drudge Manifesto with the impression that Mr. Drudge is an individual --- not unlike his nemesis Bill Clinton --- too aware of his own place in history.The extent of Drudge's own self-awareness is to such a radical degree that it has led him to use a number of McCluhanesque literary devices bordering on the bizarre and that, ultimately, detract from the text.

For example, there are a number of pages scattered throughout the work filled with nothing but oversized "0"'s or a "1"s.On another is nothing but a single declaration in smaller-than-average size type in the center of the page reading "You're boring".

The only thing boring is wading through Drudge's inane gimmicks.However, those with the stamina to meander through will be rewarded for their troubles with a transcript of the Q & A of Drudge's 1998 address at the National Press Club in which the famed Internet muckraker provides perspective into the nature of this new medium and deflects criticisms of elitist mainstream journalists jealous about sharing the media spotlight with insightful outsiders.

In reading Drudge Manifesto, one is forced to conclude that Matt Drudge has become so intertwined with the medium synonymous with his name that he is nearly unable to rise above its limitations or to provide much of an analytical perspective capable of making the information revolution an even more effective venue for further expanding the freedoms of all mankind.

by Frederick Meekins

Journalism renewed
Yep, this book needs to be required reading for those Journalism majors/minors. Folks, this is the future of Journalism... the internet, blogging, and digging up dirt before the big networks get to it. Drudge knew the risk when he was going to post the Newsweek/Lewinsky scandal deal. Now, look at him.

Gotta love Drudge's Sludge
I gave this book 3 stars although I could've gave it four.If you're a fan of his site you'll really like this book.The unconventional email style this text follows is really clever.

The thing I like about the author is he is the biggest sh#t stirrer ever and he's devoted to news, dirt, and breaking down the walls of communication.In his book, he details his rise from mediocrity to shaking the walls of the white house.His story is very good.I do enjoy his work though because he shows how lazy and clickish the "real" media is.

Giving a review of this book is kind fruitless - either you get Drudge's vibe or you don't.If you do pick this tome up. ... Read more

Isbn: 0451201507
Subjects:  1. 1946-    2. Biography & Autobiography    3. Biography/Autobiography    4. Clinton, Bill,    5. Electronic newspapers    6. Electronic publishing    7. Government - U.S. Government    8. Journalism    9. Mass Media - Newspapers    10. Political    11. Political Process - General    12. Politics - Current Events    13. Politics and government    14. Practical Politics    15. U.S. Government    16. United States    17. Clinton, Bill   

SellOut: The Inside Story of President Clinton's Impeachment
by David P. Schippers
Average Customer Review:
Hardcover (21 August, 2000)
list price: $27.95 -- our price: $27.95
(price subject to change: see help)
US | Canada | United Kingdom | Germany | France

Editorial Review

While no one came out of the Monica Lewinsky scandal looking good, David Schippers, the chief investigative counsel for the Clinton impeachment, wants to be sure Americans know just who contributed to the debacle and how. A trial attorney and a Democrat, Schippers was hired by Republican congressman Henry Hyde to lead an oversight investigation of the Justice Department, then was redirected to handle the impeachment. The quintessential honest man, Schippers was shocked, not so much by Clinton's actions (which he calls a far-reaching conspiracy to obstruct justice with perjury, lies, and witness tampering), but by Republican and Democratic politicians who sold out the impeachment process.

If you ever want to vote again, you might not want to know what went on behind the scenes in the Capitol Hill meat grinder leading up to and during the impeachment proceedings against William Jefferson Clinton.... Lies, cowardice, hypocrisy, cynicism, amorality, butt-covering--these were the squalid political body parts that, squeezed through the political processor, combined to make a mockery of the impeachment process.

Of course, Schippers does want you to know what happened, and he also wants you to vote--against those who made the mess. And so he names names--of Republican senators who refused to allow evidence on the floor, of the five Democratic congressmen who never examined the evidence, of the GOP senator who said, "You're not going to dump this garbage on us," and also of the politicians who did an honest job, or at least asked reasonable questions (such as Joseph Lieberman). Schippers also reveals the evidence he was building against the Clinton administration regarding illegal INS actions and Chinagate, but that he was forced to drop. He reviews the successful struggle to get a full hearing in the House and the "flat-out rigged ball game" in the Senate. He discusses the president's pattern of abuse and intimidation of women, including some highly disturbing information regarding Kathleen Willey, Juanita Broaddrick, and Dolly Kyle Browning.

Most of the documents related to the impeachment are still sealed, so Schippers's story is more diatribe than new information. Perhaps what this book confirms most (besides the ugly, self-serving side of politics) is the chasm between those trying Clinton, who firmly believed that his lying was destroying the structure of government, and those who felt that lying about sex was nobody's business. Schippers is clearly in the first camp: "I do not care what you are lying about. If you're the President of the United States and you lie under oath, you should be removed from office." --Lesley Reed ... Read more

Reviews (105)

Knowledge is Power?
The fragments of stories that arise from the Clinton impeachment period grow further and wider with each retelling of the story from the perspective of many who claim to know what everyone else doesn't. The analysis of each of these books reminds us that like today in the case of the Iraq War and the Bush first term, the American people actually know very little of the behind the scenes events, or their accuracy. What is clear, however, is that the White House environment has for some time now become one of the most hostile territories ofAmerica's political structure. It certainly seemed to be from the earliest time that Clinton took office until the time he left. Who knows how much is true, or false, and how it may, or may not, have been handled, and by whom? Though we may get some inkling of how the White House is designed to work from theWest Wing series, it may well be the ideal, and not the reality. If everything that has been told about Clinton was true, the American people would have seen the greatest Jeckyll and Hyde act of all time, it seems, and that would be doubtful and improbable. If it is true, it would be unusual that Hillary would want to run for President, and the people of America may need to give far more scrutiny to the Presidents it chooses than they have in the past. Either way, the impact has been felt in all quarters of the nation, and will not likely be easily forgotten. Questioning how much knowledge the people have, and how much power over the office people have are critical issues at this time in America because of the accumulated knowledge we have of all past Presidents, that grows with each new review of what America thought she knew, but found later she didn't.

Part of the story
David Schippers has written a very passionate and readable account of the impeachment of Bill Clinton.He argues persuasively that Clinton was guilty of perjury, suborning witnesses, and other crimes.But for the cowardice of his political leaders, he argues, Clinton would have been convicted of high crimes and misdemeanors and evicted from office.

Schippers expresses great frustration that American public opinion seemed to overlook or excuse Clinton's excesses, despite the overwhelming evidence proving his guilt.

What Schippers fails to mention is the chain of events leading up to the impeachment, starting with Whitewater, a small-time land deal that was seized upon and exaggerated by Clinton's enemies to discredit him and his wife.Although one independent counsel (Fiske) found no wrongdoing, Right-wing ideologues, led by Jesse Helms and Lauch Faircloth apparently influenced the appointment of a second special prosecutor, Ken Starr, who had the appropriate ideological qualifications.

What then transpired was a seven-year investigation, in essence a standing inquisistion, that morphed from an investigation of Whitewater, to an investigation of any charges the Rabid Right could promote, from Filegate to Troopergate to Paula Jones.At its highest point, the OIC employed more than 60 FBI agents and dozens of lawyers, all dedicated to finding "something" on Clinton.

No one's personal life could withstand such scrutiny, not even the Pope's.In Clinton's case, he had already established during the 1992 campaign that he was probably a philanderer and a liar.

The Rabid Right, determined to use Clinton's raging hormones to descredit him, devised an intricate conspiracy, financed by Richard Mellon Scaife's millions and aided by several Arkansas low-lifes who enthusiastically fabricated evidence to get the Clintons.As part of the conspiracy, the American Spectator ran a secret Arkansas Project, spreading money around to finance an "investigation" of the Clintons that resembled a witch hunt than an investitation.

They eventually hit upon using Paula Jones' lawsuit to entrap Clinton into perjuring himself, aided by the secret tapes Linda Tripp had made of Monica Lewinski's narration of her sexual encounters with the President.

As part of the context Schippers urges us to consider, it's important to remember that Newt Gingrich and his minions had adopted a front channel strategy to discredit the Clintons, as well.This involved among other things, using the Republicans' control of Congress to institute endless hearings and investigations of the Administration.At one point, ten different committees were investigating the Clintons, along with several different special prosecutors.

This is the background that Schippers is surely aware of but considers irrelevant to his straight-forward consideration of crimes committed by Bill Clinton.

But the American electorate, even before the Right-wing conspiracy was brought to light, saw the basic unfairness of the seven-year inquisition conducted by Ken Starr.Moreover, despite Schippers' contention that Starr was an honorable man, the public saw incessant leeks that could only have come from the OIC.Starr's office also lost credibility when it took over the Paula Jones lawsuit, becoming enmeshed in an investigation of the President's sex life for transparently political purposes.At least two books contend that Starr had earlier provided quiet legal advice to Jones's legal team, a flagrant conflict of interest for an officer of the court.

Moreover, subsequent books about the investigation -- actually, a campaign is more accurate -- reveal that Starr, the Federalist "elves" and their right-wing allies used tactics and methods that ranged from merely unethical to downright illegal.

If sixty FBI agents and a couple dozen lawyers were assigned to investigate the "investigators" I suspect every one of them would be found guilty of some crime or other.Others, like our current Solictor General, Ted Olson, would likely have been indicted for perjury.Ken Starr would probably have been disbarred in every state in the union where he is a member, and co-conspirators like Ann Coulter could well have been indicted for aiding and abetting Linda Tripp's illegal (in Maryland) unilateral wiretapping of Monica Lewinski.Coulter allegedly even made copies of the illegal tapes.At least two of the Troopers, who were reportedly paid off with Right-wing money, probably perjured themselves, as well.

So Schippers has told us a tale of the crimes of Bill Clinton, but nothing of the crimes and immoral, unethical, and illegal activities of the hunters.

The second part of the story is why the American public never really supported the impeachment, to Schippers' apparent surprise.

It's possible, by reading other sources, to conclude that Schippers himself was prepared to believe only the worst about Clinton -- that he became a zealot in pursuit of Clinton.

While Schippers buys the 17-year rape charge against Clinton, David Brock believes that the woman in question probably brought the rape charge to persuade her then-boyfriend (now husband) that her relationship with Clinton had not been consensual.

Schippers also protests that Clinton was trying to abuse power by preventing Paula Jones from having her day in court.This looks like another case of consensual sex that the Clinton-haters managed to massage into a sexual harassment case, with the express purpose of investigating Clinton's Achilles' heel -- his philandering.Jones's case apparently had major shortcomings.Under cross examination, she couldn't remember if the encounter took place in the morning or the afternoon.Moreover, Clinton apparently does not have the "distinguishing characteristics" that Jones alleges.Hers was a strange story that was summarily dismissed in court.

Even Gennifer Flowers, whom I had initially believed, now looks like an adventurer trying to boost her career with a story about a 12-year affair with Clinton.Under cross-examination, she couldn't seem to come up with dates and places of their alleged assignations -- except a Little Rock hotel that hadn't even been built until five years after the claimed date of their meeting.It sounds like Gennifer was a one-night stand who subesequently invented an on-going relationship.

So was this impeachment the partriotic undertaking Schippers contends.Well, maybe...but it was hopelessly compromised by the actions of Newt Gingrich, the Rabid Right, and the Arkansas sleeze merchants, before it ever got off the ground.

Yes, Trent Lott and company could have pushed the impeachment.Had Clinton been removed from office, however, Al Gore would have taken over which would have constituted a major leg up in the subsequent elections, and the Supreme Court would never have had the opportunity to elect our new President.

A Perfect Title
It would have been difficult to give this book a more appropriate name.David Schippers shows that there was truly a sellout in the so called senate trial on the impeachment of President Clinton.One can see the frustration of the author after participating in the collection of a vast amount of information and the House Managers not being allowed to present the bulk of this information to the senate along with appropriate witnesses.

It is his contention that the sellout was made by the senate leadership.There was no interest in even looking at the gathered evidence, and it was obvious that senatorial minds were made up even before they were sworn in before the Chief Justice for the trial.This can be compared to a jury in a criminal case having their minds made up prior to being sworn in and hearing the evidence.

The reason for the senators not wanting the President convicted in the senate was largely due to the polls showing support of the American people for the President.It can be argued that this support held fast because the Administration was able to keep all Democratic senators loyal and thus maintain the argument of this being just a partisan Republican effort to overthrow the results of the previous presidential election.

Again this can be compared to jurors in a criminal trial voting not to convict the defendant because the majority of people did not want the person convicted. ... Read more

Isbn: 0895262436
Subjects:  1. 1946-    2. Clinton, Bill,    3. Conspiracy & Scandal Investigations    4. Current Affairs    5. Government - U.S. Government    6. Impeachment    7. Political    8. Political Process - Leadership    9. Politics - Current Events    10. Politics/International Relations    11. Clinton, Bill    12. Current Issues