Events Books

Fantastic recap of decades of Sox lore! This book was a quick and interesting read, containing trivia, stats, and facts all interwoven with personal anecdotes and memories. Terrific for new or old fans - a must have for all who know and love the Sox!

Richard Roeper gives an entertaining overview of his love for the Chicago White Sox while adding interesting anecdotes about life in Chicago and in general.

As a fellow White Sox fan, I found this book to be right on the money in explaining why Chicago became a Cubs town even when the Sox had a better team (poor judgement by Sox management and changing neighborhoods).

Roeper shows his love for the White Sox and handles the subject with objectivity (when possible, given that he is a die-hard fan).

Thank goodness the White Sox have southside Chicago native Richard Roeper as a fan! The Cubs and other more popular MLB teams have a much longer roster of both author/fans (e.g. Stephen King and the Red Sox) and A-list celebrity/fans (of which the White Sox have none - sorry Jerry Springer, you're B-list). But the White Sox, with their long, interesting history and their amazing 2005 World Series run, needed someone to step up to the plate and deliver what the fan base needs: a book documenting what it means to be a White Sox fan in the four decades up to 2005. Roeper delivers a solid home run, albeit not a grand slam.

Roeper deftly interweaves three main storylines in "Sox and the City": the highlights of the past 40 years of Sox history; Roeper's own personal experiences as a fan attending more than 1000 Sox games; and the highlights of the 2005 season and World Series run. Along the way Roeper provides a personal, often humorous view of the main topics in Sox history: the different Sox teams that have been assembled over the years; what it means to be a Sox fan in what will always (unless the demographics of Chicago change radically) be a Cubs town, including especially the Sox/Cubs rivalry among the fans (which, because of geography is more passionate - at least on the Sox side - than any other intercity major league rivalry); Harry Caray's move from the Sox to the Cubs; Bill Veeck's attempts to generate excitement (and bring in paying fans) on the southside; Disco Demolition Night; the move from Comiskey to the Cell; and much more.

There is so much White Sox history that it is impossible to capture it all in a single volume, but Roeper hits all the highlights. His prose is very accessible, humorous, and direct. "Sox and the City" is likely to become the definitive guide to what it means to be a White Sox fan in the present day.

Why only four stars? Roeper's done an admirable job in all areas of the book except two: explaining precisely what made the 2005 team different than all other White Sox teams, and capturing the excitement and impact of the Sox's 2005 World Series victory on the city of Chicago. Perhaps the latter is an impossible task to translate into words - you had to be there.

All literate White Sox fans should read this book.

"Sox and the City" is a great read for any baseball lover, but particularly White Sox fans. They say that as a baseball fan you are wedded to one team for life, and live and die with them each season. Or to paraphrase one of those east coast baseball fans, baseball is not life or death, but the [White] Sox are!

"Sox and the City" will most interest Chicagosns, of course. But all baseball fans might enjoy it. After all, being a White Sox fan in a city with more than one team, and an ancient generational rivalry (I won't name that OTHER team) is an experience few living baseball fans still know. the annual highs and lows (and finally triumph) that made the suffering all worth it. Only perhaps New Yorkers share the experience (and even the New York Mets are stand-ins for the old Yankees-Dodgers-Giants rivalry).

If you love baseball, pick this one up!

Give movie critic Richard Roeper "Two Thumbs Up" for this upbeat look at rooting for the White Sox in a city where the more-popular Cubs have the advantage. Roeper describes his lifelong attachment to the Sox, recalling past baseball games, seasons, players, etc. He shows that the underdog White Sox typically draw smaller crowds and less media to their plainer arena on the city's non-glamorous South Side - add losing seasons to that mix and you can see why the Sox nearly moved to Milwaukee (1968), Seattle (1975), Denver (1980) and Florida (1988). Ironically, these hardships and the fortitude of Sox fans to endure them are rarely mentioned by a national media that fixates on the big-money Cubs and other glamour teams. Roeper concludes by describing part of the magical 2005 season, when the White Sox finally broke through and won the World Series - their first title in 88 years! That triumph cheered Chicago's long-suffering fans and attracted much-desired national attention.

This lively and often humorous narrative could have been longer than 197 fast-reading pages. I felt the author underestimated how many people in Chicago root hard for both teams, but this is still an entertaining read for baseball fans here and across the nation.

the supreme court is my life, i love it, i am doing a project oon the supreme court and i love it!i bought this cd-rom and i have not put it own since, my computer hasnt bee sut down in like 2 months, all it does is play this CD-ROM, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week! OH I LOVE THE SUPREME COURT, JUSTICE REQUEST IS SOOO FINE!!

Until Jerry Goldman created his innovative Oyez website, the experience of listening to an actual Supreme Court oral argument was available only to the lucky few hundred people who could secure a seat in the Court's formal courtroom (and to those who would travel to Washington, DC and listen to the tapes at the National Archives). Now that experience is available to anyone who has a reasonably good computer with speakers and a CD drive. Drawing on but also adding to material available on the groundbreaking Oyez site, Goldman has created a remarkable resource that makes history come alive. Litigators can listen, and learn from, some of the best appellate advocates in the country. Law students can also gain many lessons here in the craft of argument, as well as insights into some of the Court's most important decisions. This CD should be in the collection of everyone who is interested in the Supreme Court and how it functions. Especially impressive are the "highlights" links that take the listener to key exchanges between the Justices and the lawyers. Often these are points on which the decision turned. A must-have for any serious student of the Court and of appellate advocacy.

I am not a lawyer. My interest in the Supreme Court is that of an interested observer, who has particular interest in certain topics (such as Establishment Clause, Religious Freedom, etc). Even so, or perhaps especially so, I find Goldmans' product wonderful. It has everything that was missing from Peter Irons' audio series "May it Please The Court" (which wasn't much to begin with).

The Supreme Court hears oral arguments on cases, and these arguments have been recorded since the fifties. Goldman's CD contains the full audio arguments for a number of cases, and, for a few of them, also the public announcement of the decision on the case. Each case also includes a summary, which has a brief description of the facts of the case, the final decision, and final vote (which justices voted in the majority, which in the minority). That alone would make this a wonderful addition to anybody interested in the Bill of Rights or the Supreme Court. But this is not all that Goldman brings to the party.

Also included are the full text of the decisions of the cases included (Majority, concurring, and dissenting opinions), which were sorely missed in Peter Irons' book. Also, for each case, a photograph of the Court's justices is provided, with a halo effect identifying majority and minority. By clicking on a particular justice, you can hear a voice clip, to help you identify their voices when, during the arguments, they interrupt or ask questions. There is also a "highlights" option, whereby specific points in the argument are mentioned, with time index stamps, so you can listen only to those points (the presentation of the case, particular questions regarding certain issues and their replies, summary, etc). You can also use this as a sort of abbreviated program when listening to the entire arguments (which can run over 1 hour). As opposed to Peter Irons' _May it Please The Court_, there is no commentary on the arguments, which are presented completely unedited, and also no transcripts. Finally, if there are any cases which were argued or decided together with the one you are looking at, it is so noted and you can take a look at that one as well.

You can look at the cases sorted by name or by date, and also by broad topic ("Religious Freedom", "Commerce", "Sexual Discrimination", etc), by Justices sitting on the Court, or all together. The cases include some of the more important and controversial of the past 50 years: Roe v. Wade (abortion), Abington v. Schemp (school prayer), Nixon v. U.S. (executive power), New York Times v. U.S. (pentagon papers), Johnson v. Texas (flag burning), Bakke v. Regents (reverse discrimination), and many more among its more than 50 cases.

I have no complaints about the final product, and only a few wishes: I hope to see sequels, with more cases, available; although pretty close to my wish list of cases, a couple I would love are still missing (e.g. Edwards v. Aguillard). I would also have liked to be able to look at cases by author of the opinion, but this is such a minor thing that it is hardly worth mentioning. Transcripts of the arguments would be a nice addition. These are such minor quibbles, however, that they cannot mute your enjoyment of this wonderful program.

If you are a lawyer, or a student of the law, you will find this CD-ROM especially illuminating as it illuminates famous Sup. Ct. cases with the actual audio arguments and questions by the judges. The subsequent reasoning and decision of the Court is a lot clearer when viewed in the context of how the oral pleadings went. RealAudio compression allows dozens of hours of listenable audio to be burnt onto a single CD. Well worth it.

Jerry Goldman has brought forth a veritable treasure trove: full-length oral arguments from fifty landmark Supreme Court cases! Words really cannot describe what a remarkable resource SCGH is--the promise of Peter Irons's audio-tape series "May It Please the Court" is here brought to full fruition. Listen to all or only the most salient parts of an argument: nobody acts as a gatekeeper to the material. Hear the verbal inflections of the justices as they ask questions--nuances that do not come across on the written page. A separate image of the particular Court deciding the case is available, along with the opportunity to hear voice samples of each Justice, so to familiarize yourself with who is talking during arguments. A halo effect comes across the members of the majority when the word itself is clicked, and the same thing happens to members of the minority. All this, along with oral announcements of the opinions, biographical data on the justices, and text of the full opinions. That this is contained on one compact disc is mind-boggling; SCGH is essential for those with any interest in Constitutional Law.

I couldn't add anything else to the other comments; just buy it - you will not regret.

This book is truely well written. Hard to put down. If you have read: President Nixon, Final Days and Abuse of Power this book puts it all together. It is the AH! HA! you've been looking for. It will also make you curious about the Pentagon Papers. All these books are written from a historical perpective by well know historians. Not journalist looking for a quick buck.

If your goal is to understand the depth of Richard Nixon's involvement in the Watergate scandal, Stanley Kutler's `The Wars of Watergate' is the book for it. It's a great introduction to Watergate without that qualifying caveat, of course, but Kutler perches his narrative squarely on Nixon's shoulder. This book doesn't take extended side trips to the creation of the Plumbers, to that dirty trickster Donald Segretti, or the back desks in the Special Prosecutor's offices. The wars of Watergate, Kutler writes, are "rooted in the lifelong political personality of Richard Nixon," a personality that is marked by political paranoia, a determination to wreak vengeance on his enemies, and an overweening concern with winning his own elections. For those who dismiss Watergate as a third-rate burglary, or a vague `everyone else does it,' Kutler provides a substantial "discussion of the abuses of power that precede the burglary and the obstruction of justice that followed it."

Kutler sets the stage with brief chapters on the LBJ Administration, Vietnam, and a biographical sketch of Richard Nixon prior to the presidential election of 1968. We're taken closer to our subject with Kutler's next few chapters on Nixon's first term as president, where Nixon's relationship with the media (antagonistic,) and congress (disdainful,) as well as his executive style (obsessive micro-management) are surveyed. Providing as they do a context for the crimes of Richard Nixon, these prelude-to-war sections properly prepare us for the battles of Watergate.

An American constitutional historian, Stanley Kutler is well qualified to guide us through the battleground that was the second term of Richard Nixon. The war analogy is apt. For Nixon the Wars of Watergate officially begins with the immediate Administration response to the break-in at the DNC headquarters by the Watergate burglars. The first phase may be called "The War of the Burglars' Silence," a phase that is marked by Nixon's active participation in those acts that would lead to his resignation less that two years later.

One gets the strong impression that `The Wars of Watergate' is Kutler's response to future revisionist historians. The revisionist template was already being hammered out by Nixon, and others, when this book was published in 1990. If Kutler is forestalling an alternate interpretation, he does so with a well-coordinate, thoughtful, balanced, and overwhelmingly convincing presentation of facts. His interpretation - that Nixon was at the center of the Watergate cover-up from the beginning - is, with the evidence he provides to back it up, irrefutable.

Although `The Wars of Watergate' is not a complete history of the scandal, it's a good chunk of it - the heart of it, if you will. It would make a good introduction for the uninitiated. Even for Watergate wonks its expanded chapters on the Rodino chaired House Judiciary Committee, which considered impeachment, will provide fresh insights and a more complete story of an under-reported Watergate subject. This may not be the best single volume on Watergate, but if it isn't I haven't read its rival. Highest recommendation.

At least for those us who cut their political teeth during the 1960's and 1970's, Watergate and Vietnam were the watershed events. There was life before Watergate and Vietnam and life after. Stanley Kutler's work is one of the first to bring an historian's perspective to the Watergate story. As the saying goes, if you read one book about Watergate, this is the one.

Kutler is by no means neutral on Richard Nixon, but one of the unique things about Watergate was that Nixon's own taping system provided the record to hang himself. If nothing else the tapes proved Nixon was a habitual and flagrant liar. Kutler, whose regular job is as a professor at the University of Wisconsin, was drawn into a lifetime of work by his expertise on the sprawling scandal that was Watergate. His work has continued as he battled first Nixon, Nixon's estate, and then the National Archivists for full access to the White House tapes. Nixon kept up his lies and deception to his last days, with far more success than one would have hoped. In the long run, history's judgment of Nixon will be harsh and will start with Kutler's work.

Not just about Watergate, but a comprehensive look at RN's political career. The Watergate break-in came to symbolize the abuses of this imperial presidency. Excellent historical analysis. Comprehensive history not just at RN's presidency, but the evolution of the office during the Cold War. Thank goodness G. Gordon Liddy was such an incompetent stooge that the whole bag of "White House Horrors" came to light.

This book makes for interesting reading. Anyone who wants to know why there is so much dissension between muslims and other relighons should read this book. It provides insight into their beliefs, the war and many other issues.

One day at the school we were talking about different cultures and one of them was about the muslims. This book has been very helpful to me because it talks about reality. When I started to read I said oh common is this the book for which I payed ?? dollars, I say this because i don't remember how much I payed but when I started getting deep into it i realized that I had made a good investment. It's really helpful.

For anyone that loves to know another cultures this is the right book to start to know the muslims and why they do all of this. You'll find out

Human civilization has not always had a smooth path. We've had our share of natural disasters and self-inflicted wounds. As recently as the fifth century, we had a Dark Ages in Europe, in which reason was virtually repudiated in favor of tyranny. There was a threat of a repeat of that in the 1930s and 1940s in Europe. And there may be a similar threat at present.

Walid Shoebat, a former terrorist, shows, in this somewhat scary book, how serious the problem is. Quite a few people are being trained as destroyers of society. And if they succeed, that will be bad for virtually everyone.

What do the Islamic fundamentalists say? Well, they say whatever they please. And they come up with all sorts of demonizing propaganda against Western society. But to me, it all reads pretty much like a repeat of the refrain "we're going to slice and dice you." No, that's not a quote from Shoebat's book. But that's my summary of how I read Islamist propaganda. I'm a Pagan, not a Muslim, so that puts me on the wrong side of the slicing and dicing. But there really is no right side of that.

How does one reply to the Islamists? Well, there are plenty of ways. One can come up with a reasoned rebuttal. Or one can simply describe reality and warn that what goes around can come around. Or one can even answer insults with insults. But none of it does much good. We all need to value truth more in order to combat this threat to society. Right now, there's plenty of pressure on many Muslims to support the Islamists, and the main question seems to be how much support to give them. I think this book shows that we need to draw the line at demonizing untruths. I think agreeing with such lies, as a matter of course, as a matter of loyalty, as a matter of principle, as a matter of laziness, as a way to avoid trouble, whatever, is a giant leap over the line. That's what leads to the recruitment of terrorists, and we see the pattern of behavior described in detail in this book.

Shoebat makes a few specific points that I especially like. One of them deals with the "right of return." Arabs, Jews, and others lost their homes in the 1940s. What ought to be done about it? I basically agree with Shoebat's solution: nothing. No one should have a "right of return" to them. Not Arabs to the Levant and Israel, not Jews to Europe, Africa, Iraq, Yemen, and elsewhere, not Germans to Poland and the Czech Republic, not anyone. I would add that very few people who lost their homes in the 1940s are still alive. Oh, sure, people who lived in those homes are still alive. But most of those were kids, not owners. These kids never owned the homes, they never developed them, they never paid property taxes on them, and they may not ever have been the actual heirs to them.

Shoebat also discusses "reversalism," which is just one more way in which pro-tyranny thugs use words as weapons rather than as tools of communication. This is a way of simply making things up as one goes along, and it generally involves a fair amount of projection. Is one a big fan of the National Socialists? Then why not call the Jews National Socialists? Why not call liberation "occupation," why not call sorrow "joy," why not call victims "terrorists," and why not call the conspirators to terror "victims?" And we see plenty of examples of this process.

Is Islamist terror a problem for Muslims in general? You bet it is, just as National Socialism was a problem for Germans in general. And it is, of course, a problem for non-Muslims, just as National Socialism was a problem for non-Germans. One example Shoebat gives is a poll of Indonesian Muslims (Muslims are a big majority in Indonesia). "Sixteen percent of Indonesian Muslims (almost thirty million people) supported bombings, while a further twenty-five percent declined to offer an opinion." That impressed me: one would think that folks would know that suicide bombings are not doing anyone much good and that what goes around can come around. Shoebat says that a more recent survey showed that only ten per cent supported these bombings, but that is still eighteen million people. That's a problem for society. As Shoebat explains, that same survey showed that sixty-five percent of Indonesia's Muslims "do not believe that the September 11 attacks on the United States were carried out by Arabs!" That is a very big problem as far as I am concerned. This is a key untruth, and if it stands, I think it helps put civilization at serious risk.

What's the goal of the attacks on Israel? A new Arab state? No. As Shoebat tells us, it is the prosecution of jihad against the West. And what do some Western academics have to say about all this? Shoebat does mention that there is a problem here, and he quotes a few, including a couple who are at Columbia University. Yes, Columbia has a problem, but there are some other universities that probably ought make a more serious attempt to enforce academic standards.

What is to be done about the threats posed by radical Islam? Shoebat has some ideas, including removing the leaders and dismantling hate-filled mosques. He also favors presenting truth in the media and in academia.

I highly recommend this book.

Mr. Shoebat describes a frightening "death cult" that has emerged from Islam. A nice analogy I use is that the Jihadis are to Islam as the Inquisitors were to Christianity. There are ways to interpret religious texts in such a way to justify great cruelty in the service of human lust for power. Shoebat describes this phenomenon in Islam. What is scary is that most Islam in the Middle East is under the sway of these Jihadis, either to preserve the political order where loyalty and connections trump merit, or as a reaction to the speed of change in a modernizing world. Shoebat has converted to Christianity, so has a convert's zeal in seeing the flaws of his previous belief system. However, he details the abuse of women and non-Moslems, and the demonization of all who do not follow the path of whichever charismatic leader has killed his way to the top of the heap. To paraphrase him, evangelical Christians annoy you by wanting to change your head. Islamists want to cut off your head. There are other more scholarly works about the dysfunction in Islam, but Shoebat provides a raw insider's view that makes this danger very clear.

Finally, someone from the inside has been willing to share the truth in spite of death threats, including from his own family. I believe this is a book that everyone outside Islam should read, especially our elected officials that only want to talk peace or throw money at the problem. The war on terror is exactly like Mr. Shoebat listed it. This is a war against a form of Socialism that is to the extreme. I give him great credit, not only to his faith but to his courage in writing this book.

This is an amazing novel. The language is fluid and expressive. It felt like it wasn't authored at all, as though I was witnessing a natural unfolding of character, each slowly spinning out of control by their now tainted souls after witnessing 1st hand the senseless murder-spree of a public massacre -- which seems to be part of our Modern-American society. It beautifully plunges into the darkness of their souls, growing darker with every page turn. It masterfully intertwined the threads of these people's lives with perfectly placed flashbacks that piecemealed fragments of the event that began the whole bloody thing. And I really enjoyed the ending which I won't give away, but was the only real way to end it. Anyone who has suffered a traumatic event wonders: "What if I did... one thing differently that morning?" This is a beautiful piece of story-telling. And masterfully done.

What's most stunning about this novel is the way Freirich gets inside of each of his varied characters as each one bends -- or even breaks -- under the weight of their shared tragedy. His prose is always fluid and elegant, even as it shifts between the characters' many distinct points of view. The novel does skip around a lot -- between characters and through time, as the details of the shooting are gradually revealed -- but it does so in such a deliberate and skillful way that it feels like this is the only way this story could have been told. It builds steadily to an ending that's both surprising and inevitable. In short, this is a masterful first novel. I can't wait to see what else Freirich has in store for us.

How great is it to read real literature again? Such a breath of fresh air. Freirich has written a rich, completely absorbing, yet totally accessible novel. He digs into the characters and we stay with them on their transcendant journey from hapless bystander to complex, fully realized, emotionally wounded collateral vicitms of random violence. This moment is surely the most indelible moment of their lives and we feel that as they fight and struggle to figure it out themselves. The multiple viewpoints and storylines serve the incident nicely as it forces us to think how different people might process the exact same event in a completely different manner. It's provoking, and thoughtful. And the themes certainly stay with you long after you've finished. It'll be interesting to see what Freirich comes up with next.

Really what else is there to say that hasn't already been said in every review on this page. The characters are complete and vivid, the story will take you on an emotional journey very few books get right, and this one really gets it. So stop reading reviews and buy this book, it won't disappoint. FIVE STARS ALL THE WAY.

I was drawn in to the meticulous recreation of each of the main characters' worlds as they attempted to cope with the aftermath of a random horrific shooting.The author does a great job of showing their worlds rather than telling you about them. I hope the movie is as good.

First the upsides. A thoughtfully written book that challenges some long held beliefs, such as "The Founding Fathers were perfect and there is no need to change anything about the way we do things". Yes, they were innovative, but even they knew they were not perfect and thus left the Constitution open for ammendment. Here, Mr. Hill comes up with 10 ideas that he thinks will improve our system of government. In my opinion, his ideas range from brilliant, to so-so, to downright poor. In spite of that, the over-riding message, "can we do things better?", is excellent. Too many people hold the founding fathers to be prophets and the Constitution divinely inspired and second only to The Holy Bible. On the downside, if you're a Republican, you cannot miss the fact that he lays most of the blame for problems on the Republicans. He makes a weak effort, at times, to try and sound unbiased, but he's not. Second, he can be inconsistent when dealing with the rights of those in the minority on an issue. He makes the case for proportional representation by bringing up people who live in an area that is over-whelming in support for an opposing party as having no real representation because of where they live. He then asks why those in the low population states "should be protected by the will of the majority" by their equal representation in the Senate. Well, some people who live in the low population states (Wyoming) will NEVER have close to the representation of a state like California. Isn't it possible that a rancher in Wyoming or a farmer in Nebraska will have a different set of priorities and a different view on things that people in CA? By the nature that they are primarily agricultural states, won't they ALWAYS have a lower population, and thus representation? Should they be forced to do the will of the majority BECAUSE OF WHERE THEY LIVE?
Overall though, it is a good book. Please don't let his bias prevent you from getting it, just be prepared. Also, don't HAVE to agree with every idea to like it, let it just make you think about how we can do better. As for what I think are the great ideas, I'd recommend it based on the ideas of Proportional Representation (PR), Instant Runoff Voting (IRV)and a National Election Commission on it's own! Get it even just to read about those three ideas alone.

From George Scialabba's review of "10 Steps to Repair American Democracy" in The Nation, January 29, 2007 issue:

"...We now have a bit of breathing space, thanks to the midterms. It's time to consider how the right got away with it and how to prevent it from happening again. The most useful of these books...is Steven Hill's 10 Steps to Repair American Democracy...Hill's recommendations invariably hit the mark...Hill's book is a no-brainer--there's simply nothing in it to disagree with."

Complete excertps:

...We now have a bit of breathing space, thanks to the midterms. It's time to consider how the right got away with it and how to prevent it from happening again. The most useful of these books (along with Sirota's splendidly hard-hitting and extraordinarily well-documented Hostile Takeover) is Steven Hill's 10 Steps to Repair American Democracy. "To ponder the shortcomings of our political system is to court despondency," Hendrik Hertzberg observes in his foreword. The Electoral College, the Senate, the disenfranchisement of the District of Columbia, the two-party duopoly, the winner-take-all principle, partisan redistricting, 95 percent incumbent re-election rates, media concentration, Buckley v. Valeo, the K Street Project, voter turnout below 50 percent, shortages of voting machines and poll workers--this is a functioning democracy? If these travesties of logic and fairness promoted majority rule rather than prevented it, they would doubtless have been abolished long ago. Hill's recommendations, beginning with proportional representation and instant-runoff voting, invariably hit the mark, and each of them is accompanied by links to groups already on the case. Perhaps his most radical notion--as he says, it goes "to the very heart of our political system"--is that representation should no longer be based on geography. Because of partisan residential patterns, more and more election districts are noncompetitive even without gerrymandering. Tens of millions of votes in American elections don't really count; and, perhaps as a consequence, millions more are never cast. Making representation correspond to what voters think rather than where they live is now perfectly feasible, as Hill makes clear. When (if) the Democrats regain the electorate's trust, they should consider proposing that, procedurally speaking, the United States join the modern world.

Hill's book is a no-brainer--there's simply nothing in it to disagree with.

... But in a democracy, if a large enough majority of citizens want economic populism plus cultural conservatism, isn't that what there ought to be? And if that's not what there is, then it's not much of a democracy, is it? What these truisms imply is that perhaps the right thing for progressives to do is not hire ever cleverer triangulators but, instead, first make sure American democracy works (for which, see "10 Steps to Repair American Democracy") and then get most Americans to agree with us.

[...]

I heard Steven Hill give a talk about his new book, "10 Steps to Repair American Democracy", in Cambridge recently. In his book and in his talk, Hill promotes reforms such as instant runoff voting, proportional representation, direct election of the President, public campaign financing, free media time for candidates, and so on. His "ten steps" are:
1. Secure the Vote
2. Expand Voter Participation
3. Increase Voter Choice with Instant Runoff Voting
4. Scrap Winner-Take-All Elections
5. Direct Election of the President
6. Overhaul the U.S. Senate
7. Reclaim the Airwaves
8. Minimize Money's Role
9. Reform the Supreme Court
10. Restore Faith in Government

Obviously, each of these slogans really involves multiple steps. For example, "Secure the Vote" includes securing voter-verified recountable paper trails; impartial and professional election officials; and open-source software for electronic voting machines. "Expand Voter Participation" includes universal voter registration; making election day a holiday; and enfranchising prisoners and ex-cons. And so on down the list.

Hill puts the most emphasis on scrapping winner-take-all elections in favor of moderate proportional representation, of the type formerly used in the Illinois state legislature. In moderate proportional representation, three to five legislators are elected from geographical districts three to five times the size of those that currently exist. Since candidates in such districts would need only 17% to 25% of the vote to win a seat, Hill argues that minorities (political and ethnic) would gain representation proportional to their numbers, and polarization between "red" and "blue" areas would be dramatically reduced. At the same time, since these 17%-25% thresholds are much higher than those formerly used in Italy and Israel, moderate proportional representation isn't vulnerable to the sort of instability that troubled systems in which candidates could be elected with as little as 1% of the vote.

Hill's talk was held in a church, and I felt a bit like the choir, since I am familiar with most of these proposals and have supported many of them for years, to the point of writing articles and collecting signatures for instant runoff voting and proportional representation. "10 Steps to Repair American Democracy" is directed primarily toward those unfamiliar with these proposals, and seeing them for the first time.

Though Hill gives decent summaries of many of the issues and options, I personally would have liked more detailed discussions of the arguments for (and against) the various reforms proposed. I also would have appreciated more discussion on ways to work to enact these reforms -- all Hill does is suggest contacting the relevant organizations, which are listed at the end of each chapter. The writing was also tiresome on occasion, as several factoids, phrases, sentences and even a paragraph were repeated verbatim two or three times in less than 200 pages.

So although "10 Steps to Repair American Democracy" wasn't all I was looking for, it can still serve as a brief introduction to reforms whose time has come, especially valuable for people who are fed up with business as usual but don't have any idea what to do about it. I already have a lengthy list of friends and relatives to loan it to.

If the trappings of American democracy seem increasingly spurious to you this book explains why in a calm, straightforward, non-partisan way. A real eye opener for those unfamiliar with how actual democracies in other countries work. Committed curmudgeons should avoid as it's liable to inspire optimism.

The short form of my argument is that a surprisingly large fraction of the political and policy problems of the US are indirectly caused not by bad people or a system gone wrong, but by a bad system. The US hasn't been losing its democracy so much as its once state-of-the-art democracy has been obsolete for a long time. Our electoral and governmental systems have been showing their flaws more and more as the world changes. Our system unnecessarily encourages otherwise decent people to do bad things, and that's tragic.

First off, stop reading right now, and buy "10 Steps to Repair American Democracy" by Steven Hill (only $11). The flaws in our democratic systems are no mystery; political scientists have known about them for decades, and in some cases, centuries. [Why they haven't done anything about them is another matter. Maybe it's because America has always been good to its elites. Maybe too many political scientists augment their incomes through political consulting and helping politicians game the existing system ;-)]

Let me indulge in a little intellectual laziness myself and point out that the 10 steps outlined in Steven Hill's book are absolutely necessary to fix the problems and keep them fixed:

Secure the vote
Expand voter participation
Increase voter choice with Instant Runoff Voting (IRV)
Scrap winner-take-all elections: use Proportional Representation (PR) for legislatures
Scrap the electoral college and elect the President via direct IRV election
Overhaul the US Senate
Reclaim the publicly owned airwaves and make sure they serve to educate our citizens
Minimize money's role in politics
Reform the Supreme Court
Restore faith in government

Steven Hill has backed up these basic goals by documenting concrete proposals that are either already underway or are obvious next steps. Now it's up to you, me, and everyone to start doing the hard work needed to fix our country. Hint: the answer is NOT simply to elect Democrats. We need to elect candidates who demonstrate awareness of the underlying problems facing us and pledge to advance the right systemic solutions.

As we contemplate the upcoming presidential election, it is crucial that we try to educate candidates about the solutions discussed in Hill's book. Not sure what to do? For starters, you could do worse than to buy "10 Steps to Repair American Democracy" for your favorite candidate and a friend or family member. But don't stop there! There are a lot of organizations to plug into, and many more that need to exist but don't yet. Yes, we all hate politics, but Steven Hill's book shows us that it doesn't have to be that way.

Murphy

i'm buying copies to give to family and friends. i'm buying copies to hand out to the young, disinfranchised people i meet. it's invigorating and i plan to follow all its suggestions.

This is the must-have quick reference guide for progressives and moderates. Whether you are an activist, an aspiring activist, or a someone who just wants to have the answers to shut up your conservative friends and family, this is the book for you. This is the handy go-to book for anyone looking to take on the misleading propoganda of the right in today's fractured society.

Let me also say that if you are looking 50 simple ways to take on the Right, this book will give you that and much more. Yes, it does have 50 areas in which to take on the Right, but it provides several options for doing so in each of the 50 areas. Therefore, you can choose some or all of the options depending upon what you choose. Moreover, it lists resources where you can go for assistance or more information.

But "50 Simple Things" does not stop there. Need a list of progressive news sources: it's in the book. This book is chock full of internet web sites and web logs to help you coordinate with others or gather more information. Media watchdogs: they're in the book. In fact, there are so many internet sources listed in this book that I became physically tired of linking to all of them.

But this book is not just for internet geeks like me, it has phone numbers for organizations that you can contact. Ideas for campaigns and campaign volunteers. Little ways that you can stick it to the Right.

This is the handiest quide for progressives and moderates I have yet to see. I have read many books on progressive issues, but none match "50 Simple Things" in ease of reading and coverage of major issues. And the best thing is that "50 Simple Things" is about simple things everyone can do and it is set out in a concise book that is less than 200 pages. All of the things you need in a small, very portable format.

This is a great resource for anyone concerned about the direction our country is being moved in. It's time for the "common sense" majority to stop being silent witnesses.

This is a great book for any budding political activist, or anyone who just wants to do something to help fight the rise of the conservative-religious-right movement in the United States. It's a quick read and is organized so that it can be used as a ready reference.

I found out I was alredy doing about 33% of the 50 things, but even for those I was already doing, helpful information and sources were provided that made the purchase worthwhile.

My wife read part of the book, and wound up putting a sticker for the Green Party candidate for Senate in our state; one of her coworkers noticed and asked my wife about who that person was, and as a result, the Green Party candidate has gained another vote.

As the title states, this book describes a number of things that anyone can do to counteract the Right's strong influence in present-day America.

Some of the actions included require little or no effort. Join a progressive group, be it local or international. Take back control of the American political vocabulary. Donate a subscription to a progressive magazine to your local library. Become familiar with the parts of the Bible that support progressive positions. Visit alternative news web sites. Also, visit right-wing sites to begin to understand the Right.

Some actions require a little more effort. Adopt a blog. Write a letter to the editor of your local newspaper (even if your letter is not printed, it might encourage the editor to print a similar letter). Did you know that the Pledge of Allegiance was written by a Christian socialist named Francis Bellamy? Talk to your neighbors, and to your congressperson's local office. Attend local meetings, like school board, city council or planning and zoning commission; the Right will be there. Support public education, along with local arts and artists. Stand up for science in the classroom. Volunteer for a political campaign.

For the committed individual, become an expert on a particular subject. Look for right-wing spin in your local media. Start your own media. On Election Day, become a poll watcher. Spread the word the "person of faith" does not automatically equal "conservative." Last, but not least, why don't you run for office?

The only part of this book that may cause disagreement is the assertion of the publishers that the Democratic Party needs to be reformed back into the progressive party it once was. Like it or not, America is a 2-party system, and reforming the Democratic Party is easier than starting over with a third party. On the other hand, many people in America believe that the Democrats are just as bad as the Republicans, and, therefore, not worth saving.

Aside from that, this is a gem of a book. It contains plenty of inspiration for people of any age or income level. Even if the reader can do only 1 or 2 of the things mentioned in this book, it will help to change the tide in America. This book is very much worth reading.

"Africa Unchained" is a very interesting book. It proposes "the blueprint for Africa's future." To find out how workable the proposal is one has to read the book. However, here is how the author goes about the subject. First, he explains why Africa is poor. Four themes form the answer. One, Africa is poor because of the failure of Western policies. Second, Africa is poor because of the ill-conceived development model African countries pursued upon political independence - its ideology, strategies, mistakes, and a feeble leadership. Third, colonial and neo-colonial policies hampered progress "by imposing an alien system that destroyed Africa's heritage". Finally, Africa is poor because of unfavorable development finances, which made possible a resource curse, widened resource gap, and facilitated aid dependency.

Out of the failure emerged a new set of problems such as an exploitative state, which promoted wrong-headed industrialization policies, along with self-destructive agricultural, inflation, and foreign debt policies.

To avoid further failure and get out of poverty, Africa needs a new approach. The proposal recommends development of indigenous economic systems which are supportive of property rights, and free market and voluntary exchange mechanisms. The book cites Botswana as an example that development is possible in Africa if one follows the "Atinga development model". The Atinga model centers on a new strategy that is taking place at the village level, is inclusive of the informal sector and invests in it. If that happens, an African Renaissance will follow.

This is a credible effort, indeed. My hesitation is that focus on Africa, instead of African countries is unlikely to produce helpful results. In the age of globalization, endogenous systems are likely more productive than indigenous systems. Strongly recommended.

Amavilah, Author
Modeling Determinants of Income in Embedded Economies
ISBN: 1600210465

This book, in a word is: Remarkable! God created "All Men Equal", and suffice to say, African's wherever they are in the Diasporia, are, apart of the Human Family. We all know the history of Colonialism/Slavery; however, Africa, through the Post colonial period has had about a little over 40 years to work toward: Social Stability, Nationhood, Systems of Government-that works, and developing strategies of amalgamation/unity and [Order] Social Order, that would ensure, development in all phases of social acceptance, and a recognition that Africa is ready to join the Nations of the Industrial Revolution. Sadly, Africa, has not reached the rate of development that is required and that other continents under Quasi-Colonialism have achieved. This has always troubled me. This book tells in stark terms, why the Sub-African Continent continues to lag behind the Universal Determinants. This book puts the blame on African Leadership and in details supports it's thesis with inexplicable evidence. Sure, it speaks of the lingering vestiges of Colonialism, but, the emphasis is on the modern leaders who have "shortchanged" Africa's [Greatest Resource]...the People. This book, was the "cornerstone" for my research and understanding of the chronic problems of Africa's Underdevelopment. The Premise in my view is this: If Africa remains in it's current state, the Peoples of African Descent around the Globe with find Freedom and their proper place in the World of Division of Races and Ethnicity, wanting. I recommend this book to all scholars and those who seriously long for the remedy of how to resolve and solve and find the Social Solutions to Africa's problems. Africa remains: The sleeping giant!

Excellent, very well written, researched and a must for anyone who is serious about economic development in Africa

This is the most brilliant text on Africa I have read, and I don't say that lightly. With almost 500 pages of small text, it's not exactly a breeze to get through, but it is worth every second spent. The author unapologetically describes the mess that the "Hippo" generation following decolonization made, and how it ruined the continent. His prescriptions, which amount to `Africans must solve their own problems in their own way, growing out of African traditions', is right on. I hope that anyone interested in Africa reads this book.

He put's his faith on africa's young up and coming "cheetahs", and so do I. I feel empowered by George's bare knuckle rumble in the jungle with the political elite and can't wait to join this fight.
They'll fight dirty, and we'll fight smarter and faster and with a good old man like George to show us the tricks, we shall overcome.

This is simply the best book for those analyzing longitudinal data (data measured at more than one time point). Singer's coverage of Hierarchical Linear MOdeling (HLM) is clear, well-written (sprinkled with humor, it's like a lecture by the most popular prof. at your school), and geared towards researchers who need their programs to run, not just learn the mathematical underpinnings. Singer and Willett (the coauthor, not listed above!) set the standard for presenting math/statistics book examples.

THe authors accomplish the latter by keying her examples to data located at a UCLA website; you can run the same programs on the same datasets used in the book (wow!), and compare your output, troubleshooting any problems you may have. Singer and Willett (her coauthor, not listed here!) provide outputs and programs correspoing to several of the most popular statistical programs, including SAS and SPSS.

SInger and Willet also explain the rationale for using HLM over more traditional techniques such as regression. Simply stated, regression aggregates at a level that cause one to lose information (and hence the power to detect differences.) HLM allows one to look at overall differences due to time, but also the trajectories of individual differences who are "nested" within those time points. It's the (relatively) new thing, and is increasing used by investigators, and desired by peer reviewers.

As supplements, I suggest using the UCLA website mentioned above, subscribing to an e-mail LISTSERV for interesting (though sometimes compicated discussions of "multilevel modeling" (MULTILEVEL@JISCMAIL.AC.UK), and searching for Judith Singer's website through Google or A9 (if you use A9--"Alexa"--enough you'll get a small discount at Amazon.com). Also, compare Amazon's and Judith Singer's (through her website) current prices on this book.

I find Professor Singer's Book to be a most informative and useful tool for anyone who wishes to better understand Multilevel Modeling.

Clearly written text... and usefull for researchers.
I would recommend it to anyone starting to learn about the subject!

This is an excellent book. Multilevel modeling and survival analysis are becoming increasingly important in psychological studies, but are pretty complicated procedures. Singer & Willet offer both a conceptual background and practical ways to do the analyses in a clear, understandable manner. The book is very readable and will be an important reference for future analyses!

This book does a particularly good job of explaining the substantive meaning of the equations involved in multilevel modeling analyses. It spends a lot of extra time explaining what the equations mean in real world terms using examples from actual data sets. I teach a graduate level course on HLM and I much prefer this book to the Raudenbush & Byrk book because it not only does a better job of explaining the math (for graduate students less comfortable with statistics) but the chapters are also sprinkled with incredibly useful advice on actually running the analyses (getting them to converge, interpreting them, etc.) The Raudenbush & Bryk book probably does a slightly better job of presenting the equations, but it falls short on explanation and practical advice. If you were only going to buy one HLM book, I would start with this one.

As an adult convert to Catholicism struggling for now five years with infertility, a non-American and the daughter of a founder of my hometown's Family Planning Association, I ordered this book wondering if it would help me sort out my mixed feelings about abortion. When it arrived my heart sank: though I had been interested in the topic, it looked long enough to remind me of the first-grader's book report, ``This told me more than I wanted to know about penguins.'' But it's so well-written, well-peopled and thoughtful it's a joy to read. When Cynthia Gorney describes a pro-choice activist she does it so carefully you feel certain she's pro-choice, and certain you must be. But when she describes a pro-life activist, you realize she might be pro-life -- and so might you be. If we were all be so generous and balanced, so readily able to enter into the subtleties of other people's positions, abortion might never have become a ``war.''

This book was wonderful. Though on first glance it seems very long and likely dense and dry, it is anything but. Gorney does a fabulous job of presenting both sides of abortion evenly and without bias. And she ties in the thoughts and feelings of the players with the actual battles of the day so smoothly that the book ends up being an easy and very enjoyable read. It should be mandatory reading for anyone involved in, interested in or having an opinion about abortion.

Before Roe vs. Wade thousands of women a year were getting illegal, unsanitary and oftentimes dangerous abortions. Articles of Faith does a great job of presenting both sides of the abortion argument. The book focuses on the abortion wars in Missouri. It starts in the 60's with Judith Widdicombe, who is an obstetrics nurse and who had an abortion herself. She is a key figure in the underground abortion world in St. Louis. She recruits doctors and she directs women to doctors. Her opinions on abortion are formed from personal experience as well as occupational experience. She was strong in her opinions that a baby and a fetus were different. She had seen hospital beds full of women dying of infection from getting illegal abortions. This led her to her calling.
While Judy was directing women to safer but still illegal abortions, the laws state by state were slowly starting to break down. This created a movement of concerned citizens who were against abortion. These citizens would give presentations using medical and scientific information to support their position that life begins at creation. As to drive their point home, they would show pictures of aborted fetuses. These pictures featured a trash can full of little fetuses and a bloody mass of appendages. What they didn't realize is that people like Judy Widdicombe looked at the same stuff, in real life-not in photographs. She would bring women with gauze and bandages stuffed up their vaginal cavities and let them miscarry in her home. She would then examine the remains of the miscarrage and make sure there wasn't anything left inside the woman.
After Roe vs. Wade, Judy set up a clinic specifically for performing abortions-the first one of its kind in Missouri. She wanted it accessible for all women, and wanted a warm and medical environment that set women at ease-they knew their situation was understood and they knew they were safe. This is where Samuel Lee is introduced. He arrived in St. Louis in 1978 intent on studying theology at Saint Louis University's seminary. As soon as he arrives he becomes involved with the Franciscans. They hosted a meeting of people planning a protest on the steps of an abortion clinic. This was how Sam became drawn into the abortion argument-he was exhilarated by it. Sam researched both sides of the abortion argument, but the more he read the more he became convinced that abortion was never justified-it was putting an end to human life. He left the seminary and became engulfed in the protests and the research-he would protest and be arrested until there was no longer a need to protest abortion.
The abortion argument came to a head in the 80's when Sam and Lou DeFeo wrote a bill that was passed by the Missouri state Senate and the House. It became a Missouri law in 1986. The bill stated that public funds may not be used for abortions and public employees may assist in abortions. The bill also stated that life begins at conception, unborn children have interests that should be protected and the parents of an unborn child have protected interests in the child. But that's only the beginning. The bill says that unborn children at any stage of development should have the same rights of all of other people. This was the first attempt to reverse the ruling of Roe vs. Wade, and it seemed well on its way.
One month before the law took effect, a lawsuit was filed against the bill by Frank Susman. He approached Judy, who had been fighting for almost 30 years for the woman's right to choose, and she was hesitant to join the lawsuit. She was tired of the fight, but she couldn't turn her back on this lawsuit-this one was too dangerous to reproductive health. The judge in that suit came back in 1987 declaring that every provision in the bill was unconstitutional. In 1989, the law suit went to the U.S. Supreme Court for appeal and the justices left Roe vs. Wade alone. The problem with this ruling is the vagueness of the language in the ruling-saying that parts of Roe needed to be more defined, but that it needs to be argued for years to come. When I read the ruling in this book, I really didn't understand exactly what it meant. It almost seemed like the judges had very definite opinions, but they were all different from each other.
After reading this book, I was more affirmed in my own opinions of abortion. It was really interesting to read the other side of the argument. There's no arguing that at life begins at conception-just like a every cell in our body is life, so is a zygote. However, the foundation of my belief in the pro-choice movement lies in the belief that a woman has the right to decide if a fetus should be born. One of the best bumper stickers I've seen about abortion is "Don't like abortion? Don't have one." A woman deserves the choice, that's it-PERIOD.

Written in 1998, and criticized for stopping its retelling of the abortion story in the U.S. several years before that, Articles of Faith is nevertheless still an important book and may be increasingly so if the abortion debate heats up again now that George W. Bush is President. A completely even handed retelling of the history of the abortion debate in the U.S. from the 1960's through the 1990's told through the lives of dedicated partisans of both sides. Yet the author tells this story with sympathy to both sides. Its hard to read this book, your emotions swing from side to side in the debate as Gorney shifts her focus from chapter to chapter from pro choice to pro life. Each side is presented forcefully, but not stridently. Its an excellent book.

Once in a while, there's a rare book that'll smack you in the noggin, grab you by the lapels and scream, "This is how it really is! Now learn something!"

Articles of Faith is one of those books. You'll learn abortion is never nearly so clear cut as "either side" would have you believe; you'll see how each side's arguments, legal status, movements and, later, extremism are developed. But most importantly, you get the honest truth about what it's all really about, or not about. Despite the serious of the issue, I was never even able to get a glimmer of what Gorney's own view is of abortion. It's not simply objective; it never fails to delve into the details of each side, while coming up with an occasional fresh insight.