U Books

This is an EXCELLENT book about the inner workings and decision makeing process of the Bush Administration during Panama and Desert Shield/Storm.

It is easy to become jaded today about what our government is doing and why, but The Commanders, is one of the most engaging looks at your government coming together. For better or for worse, it is even more engaging since so many of the "players" in this book are in the forefront of our news today. One of Woodwards' best.

I bought this book on a Friday night and compulsively read the book until Sunday morning. The read is quick, and the parts about Panama are very fascinating. It's nice to read about something that doesn't involve the Middle East....oh wait a minute, the middle east is covered as is the military history of this period. Colin Powell is a hero and a great pragmatic man, which mkes me long for the pre-Clinton days. History would be much different if Goerge the 1st stayed in power just 4 more years. The bravery and pragmatism of the 1st Bush administration makes you wonder about this Bush administration.

Bob Woodword seems to have become the reporter of authority when it comes to writing what I have heard called "instant histories", that is, histories that will surely be expanded as perspective is gained on a given event, but ones that accurately record how people saw things at the time. In "The Commanders" Woodword gives blow by blow accounts of two major foreign policy crisis' which ultimately led to military action: the removal of Manuel Noriega from Panama and Operation Desert Storm. The book is a quick and absorbing read, focusing almost entirely on the relationhip between the military (Pentagon) and civilian (White House) leaderships, and how that relationship operates during a crisis.

I assume that many who read this book now look to widen their view of some of the key players in the current administration, namely Cheney, Powell, and Wolfowitz (though in much lesser role here) and now is as good a time as any to do so. My impression of Powell, while widened, remains consistent. He comes off as more hesitant to use force than others, very conscious of organization, very thorough, and very aware that words have power. Cheney, however, doesn't at all resemble his sinister caricature. He, too, is careful and analytical, often concerned with Bush "ratcheting up the rhetoric way too much," and, at one point, even recomending that Bush slow down and "wait for the UN." Whereas these two figures are painted as rivals within the "W" administration, they pictured as allies in the first Bush Administration.

Our problems with diplomacy are also present, though they are not the focus of the book. The presumed reaction from Latin America contrained our ability to craft a war plan in Panama, even though it was "anticipated that privately most of these governments would send back-channel word that they were nuetral or even pleased" that Noriega was removed, and it was certain that the Panamanian people hated their leadership (92% were ultimately in favor of Noriega's removal, according to Woodword). Also, many instances show Arab regimes begging for protection, though not wanting their populations to know about the American presence. At one point, the exiled Emir of Kuwait even refuses to meet with members of the US Senate. And of course, "The French were a problem and required a major effort". We will continue to have problems if governments, particualrly democratic ones, refuse to reveal to their publics what they see as in their own national interest. Ahh, the trials of a superpower!

If you are looking for an account of the diplomatic manuevering, the assembling of the coalition, or the national political debate preceeding either conflict; or you want an account of Gulf I itself, this is not your book. Taken for what it is, however, "The Commanders" is an excellent. There are a number of times where statements from this book could fit perfectly into the latest foray in Iraq, but I'll let you hunt for those.

Lastly, funniest line in the book: "the secure internal electronic-mail system, called E-mail, provided a means of quick nearly instantaneous communications by computer with the boss." Who knew only a decade ago that you needed someone to explain what an E-mail is?

This book starts at the beginning of the GHW Bush Administration and goes through to the very beginning of the Gulf War.
It's always a little difficult to know how accurate Woodward's recountings are of conversations and inner-thoughts of the most important people, but there are rarely serious complaints about the accuracy of his books - at least as far as I am aware. For the most part, the book comes from the perspective of Powell and Cheney, with important additions from other key folks at the Pentagon and White House.
The beauty of reading about the GHW Bush Administration is that one also learns about the GW Bush Administration, for many of the key players came back for an encore.

Woodward did a top notch job of discussing important issues in a way that appeals to the general reader. I hope he continues to do so with the GW Bush Administration; both "Bush at War" and "Plan of Attack" are fine books, but "The Commanders" is much better.

This book is packed with ideas on winning back customers. It takes CRM to a new level. The authors have a great understanding of what motivates the customers' decisions.

We have utilized Customer Winback as a tool in taking our organization to the next level of service recovery. As a healthcare organization renowned for service excellence, we found that this book assisted us in developing new approaches through the case studies and examples offered by the authors. The information provided is clear, straightforward and easy to translate to any industry. It is refreshing to read a book that focuses of the value of keeping existing customers rather than constant recruitment of new customers. I would highly recommend Customer Winback.

This book deals with the often neglected area of bringing customers back once you have lost them. Griffin and Lowenstein give the reader numerouse specific strategies and tools for winning back lost customers, saving customer before they defect and "making your company defection-proof."

As I have stated in my review for "The Journal of Consumer Marketing",each chapter summarizes the points succinctly in a method that allows the reader to digest the material for long-term memory.

This book is right for people who have,had, or hope to have customers. It is one of the most comprehensive books on getting,keeping and getting back customers that I have encountered. It is for people who teach marketing and for people who do marketing.

Customer Winback has great information and wonderful examples (presented in depth) of what companies can do to address a much-neglected area of customer service--winning back lost customers. It shows how this concept is just as important as emphasizing customer loyalty and customer satisfaction in not only maintaining customers, but keeping them delighted and coming back to buy more.

It is very well organized, well-written and covers a wide range of material. It also gives you many ideas to implement at your own company. Just one chapter provides you with more substance than many entire books. This is an excellent customer service book and a must for customer service managers. I recommend it highly.

Customer Winback has great information and wonderful examples (presented in depth) of what companies can do to address a much-neglected area of customer service--winning back lost customers. It shows how this concept is just as important as emphasizing customer loyalty and customer satisfaction in not only maintaining customers, but keeping them delighted and coming back to buy more.

It is very well organized, well-written and covers a wide range of material. It also gives you many ideas to implement at your own company. Just one chapter provides you with more substance than many entire books. This is an excellent customer service book and a must for customer service managers. I recommend it highly.

The photographer has really captured the feel of Ellis Island. A visit to the island is a must for people visiting New York. Whether this was the first stop for your ancestors on their arrival to the new world, or they came through other ports of entry, I think the general experiences were the same. All the feelings of expectation, fear, joy or the disappointment of making such a long journey only to be detained or turned back while in sight of the "promised land" are tangible in Stephen Wilkes' images.

As an artist, I purchased this after my artist friend showed it to me, to use as a guide for selecting particular colors and/or color combinations in abstract paintings. It is amazing that the light in the photos has been captured as it truly was--not altered or enhanced with SW to convey a particular mood. Everyone I have showed this to has been propelled to stop and look through every image in the book--it draws you in as you flip through the pages. The colors portray emotion. Content is one of a kind. Highly recommended.

I found this book to be stunning and thought provoking-I wondered about how frightened and angry immigrants must have been to be treated in such a way after what they went through before.

The pictures speak of the passing of time with such a quietness. One can only imagine the complete opposite when Ellis Island was a sea of humanity speaking and crying and hoping while glimpsing NY's famed skyline so nearby. So many hopes realized, so many unfulfilled.

I Love this book, the pictures are beautiful, the design and layout make the pictures and quotes very moving. As a photographer I admire the quality of the work, and the bright vivid prints. I love that most of the images are full pages, sometimes spread across two pages, with small text labeling the room, or part of the property. There are no frames, page designs, or paragraphs to take away from the imagery. For more information and details the photographer includes a section of thumbnails with descriptions, stories about the room, or the shooting conditions, or even bitd of history. The thumbnails and text are at the back of the book with an arial shot and map showing the layout of the buildings. It really helps to peice together the history of Ellis Island. The quotes including add to the emotion behind the images, and I like that they were on parchment paper, so that you can see the pictures behind it. The books are being enjoyed by me and my mother, who is very interested in the hostory of Ellis Island, while I enjoy it for the photography. Great book to own, everyone should have a copy.

This review mostly concerns the Enquiry. The Letter is primarily a defense of Hume's earlier Treatise of Human Nature, while his Abstract is an anonymous review of the Treatise. It strikes me as very funny, though not surprising, that Hume would review his own work. Funny because any author would give his right arm to get at least one favorable review when all the other critics are completely missing its point. Unsurprising because Hume was probably one of the only people alive at that time who could truly grasp all the facets of his radical philosophical claims.

The Enquiry was written after the Treatise. Hume, though he claimed the opposite, seems never to have really recovered from the blow he took from seeing his Treatise "fall dead born from the press." As a result, his Enquiry is far more cautious in the steps it takes. (For those of you who have read both, yes, I swear, Hume IS more cautious. Compare the claims.) A more robust philosophical stance is taken in his Treatise, while a more focused stance is taken in his Enquiry.

The Enquiry is mainly a work of epistemology and as such, scrutinizes our methods of acquiring knowledge. Making perhaps the most radical (and poignant) claim in all of modern philosophy, it posits, and supports, that there is NO causation, only conjunction. That, for example, when we see a glass drop and break, we cannot say we know gravity caused this (in the way we know two plus two equals four). All we see is constant conjunction. The connection is lacking, i.e., it is not inconceivable that the glass wouldn't bounce, turn to ash, or dissolve into sand (the way it is inconceivable that two plus two equals five). This, in effect, nullifies all the so called "laws" of nature that are formed by science. (Note that this does not state that there are no laws of nature, just that we really can never make the claim that we ever really know there are laws of nature.)

This could be thought of as the philosophical shot heard round the world. Agree or disagree, Hume must be answered. Hume has historically been charged with creating an intellectual and philosophical cul-de-sac with his skepticism. To paraphrase Bertrand Russell, Hume makes a claim which none can refute, but at the same time one which none can accept. In effect, Hume's philosophy seems to bind the human mind, stopping its journey of discovery and ultimately accomplishing what his predecessor, John Locke, set out to do, i.e., map the extent of human knowledge.

However, where one may see Hume's philosophy as shackles and fetters in the search for truth, one could also equally see his philosophy as liberation. Implicit in his philosophy is the idea that ANYTHING is possible. There are no shackles, no fetters, no limits; only those that we create for ourselves. Our limits are self-imposed, constructs of our observance (and inference) of connection. In this way Hume appears in the same light as the Eastern masters seeing that reality is not what we have (through experiential knowledge) believed it to be. It is something much more wondrous. In Zen, our causal thinking is the only barrier between the person and enlightenment. Hume could be seen as implying that when the idea of causality is removed, with only conjunction remaining in its place, the state of true knowledge and wisdom (true zen) is achieved.

This, of course, is only idle speculation. But it is stated so as to demonstrate the richness and immense possibility Hume's philosophy possesses when seen in the correct light. Instead of saying, "Nothing is certain," after reading Hume, one can say, with equal validity, "Anything is possible." The first statement approaches philosophy with despair. The second approaches it with a sense of childlike wonder and hope at the immense possibilities of reality. It approaches life as a beginning, not an ending. It approaches life as the philosopher approaches it.

If one accepts the methodology of Descartes in applying scepticism to reason and the senses, in effect denying the existence of all things but a "thinking thing," two entailments are logically consequent: Either Berkeley's idealism or Hume's scepticism. I don't accept Descartes' starting point, so I find the entailments confused and incoherent. But if one does accept Descartes' starting point, then the two extremes must be heeded. If for no other reason than observing the absurdity of either man's conclusions, it is valuable to read both entailments. But in their confused process, both men bring certain salient features to light.

Hume accepts Descartes starting point, making it his own. But to Descartes method, he adds Pyrrhonist scepticism: That all reason leads to infinite regress, and that all sensations (or impressions) can not be trusted.

Hume begins with the conclusion that all sense perception is either an impression or idea. Even memory and imagination, two other faculties of the mind, are conflated into these two species of perceptions, as impressions. Their difference is one of degree (vivacity), not of kind. Hence, Hume is the author of what is known as the "Copy Principle." Instead of unmediated, direct perception through the ordinary senses, all perception is mediated by the imagination into impressions and ideas. From this follows certain resemblances, contiguity, and causal associations between impressions or ideas, and from this association we develop a sense of self. But even the notion of causality here is one of implied inference, not of actual inductive reason. Hume denies there is any real causality that can be known, although we operate "as if" we infer cause from effect. Even probability is reduced to a mere association of ideas and/or impressions; because neither reason (which always leads to infinite regress) or senses (which can always be deceived) can actually be true. The Enquiry also treats of miracles and the testimony of others derisively; but don't we rely on the testimony of others who claim the earth is round rather than flat, just as we rely on others who testify to miracles in a byegone era? After all, few of us have direct experience with a spherical earth (Popper makes this observation).

Hume's method incorporates five kinds of scepticism: (i) methodological, (ii) conceptual, (ii) nomological, (iv) explanatory, and (v) reductive empiricism. His commitment to scepticism is not without some capitulation. While he denies absolute causality and inductive inference and probability in an actual senses, he relies on them for practical purposes. One can't remain a pyrrhonist for long; some elements of reason and some degree of confidence in impressions is necessary for ordinary life. But if one starts with Descartes' starting point, extreme scepticism is a necessary entailment. Which, after seeing Hume deny so much intuition, is it really worth starting with Descartes' scepticism? Answering that question is what makes Hume interesting.

David Hume was perhaps the leading light in the Empiricist movement in philosophy. Empiricism is seen in distinction from Rationalism, in that it doubts the viability of universal principles (rational or otherwise), and uses sense data as the basis of all knowledge - experience is the source of knowledge. Hume was a skeptic as well as empiricist, and had radical (for the time) atheist ideas that often got in the way of his professional advancement, but given his reliance on experience (and the kinds of experiences he had), his problem with much that was considered conventional was understandable.

Hume's major work, 'A Treatise of Human Nature', was not well received intially - according to Hume, 'it fell dead-born from the press'. Hume reworked the first part of this work in a more popular way for this text, which has become a standard, and perhaps the best introduction to Empiricism.

In a nutshell, the idea of empiricism is that experience teaches, and rules and understanding are derived from this. However, for Hume this wasn't sufficient. Just because billiard balls when striking always behave in a certain manner, or just because the sun always rose in the morning, there was no direct causal connection that could be automatically affirmed - we assume a necessary connection, but how can this be proved?

Hume's ideas impact not only metaphysics, but also epistemology and psychology. Hume develops empiricism to a point that empiricism is practically unsupportable (and it is in this regard that Kant sees this text as a very important piece, and works toward his synthesis of Empiricism and Rationalism). For Hume, empirical thought requires skepticism, but leaves it unresolved as far as what one then needs to accept with regard to reason and understanding. According to scholar Eric Steinberg, 'A view that pervades nearly all of Hume's philosophical writings is that both ancient and modern philosophers have been guilty of optimistic and exaggerated claims for the power of human reason.'

Some have seen Hume as presenting a fundamental mistrust of daily belief while recognising that we cannot escape from some sort of framework; others have seen Hume as working toward a more naturalist paradigm of human understanding. In fact, Hume is open to a number of different interpretations, and these different interpretations have been taken up by subsequent philosophers to develop areas of synthetic philosophical ideas, as well as further developments more directly out of Empiricism (such as Phenomenology).

This is in fact a rather short book, a mere 100 pages or so in many editions. As a primer for understanding Hume, the British Empiricists (who include Hobbes, Locke, and Berkeley), as well as the major philosphical concerns of the eighteenth century, this is a great text with which to start.

Hume, I and many others think, was the greatest philosopher to have written in English, and this is the book to pick up if you want to introduce yourself to Saint David's distinctive brand of classical empiricism. This is a must-read for anyone with even a passing interest in philosophy, and it's hard for me to see how anyone interested in the history of modern thought can avoid reading this book or the corresponding sections of Hume's Treatise.

As is well-known, the Enquiry concerning Human Understanding was intended as an encapsulation and popularization of the views Hume defended in Book I of his magnum opus, A Treatise of Human Nature. Hume assumed that book's commercial failure could be accounted for by its length, difficulty, and lack of accessibility, and so, being a man who desired literary fame, he hoped to acquire commercial success by presenting the same ideas in a more appealing and accessible manner. Unfortunately, it seems Hume misunderstood what the literati of his day were looking for in a philosophical treatise. For the Enquiry, like the Treatise before it, didn't bring him the fame he sought. Still, Hume did understand what goes into writing excellent philosophical prose, and consequently this book is a much easier read than Book I of the Treatise. Indeed, this book constitutes an excellent introduction to Hume's thought, and, except for maybe Berkeley's Three Dialogues, I can't think of another primary source that would serve as a better introduction to classical British empiricism.

Now, let's get to the ideas here. Hume, like the other classical empiricists, was primarily concerned with the psychological question of the origin of our concepts. About the answer to this question, the empiricists were all agreed--our concepts are furnished by experience, which includes both sensory experience and introspection (i.e., the experience of our own mental states). And the empiricists also agreed about the way we can justify our beliefs. Some beliefs are true (or false) in virtue of the ideas they contained, and we can know their truth (or falsity) simply by thinking about them; other beliefs are true (or false) in virtue of how the external world is, and we can know their truth (or falsity) only by drawing on our experiences of the world. According to Hume, all substantial conclusions about the world fall into this second category. That is, the truth (or falsity) of all substantial claims about the existence and nature of things in the external world can be discovered only by checking those claims against the evidence of our senses.

The traditional way of placing Hume within the story of empiricism goes something like this. Hume takes up the empiricism of Locke and Berkeley and pushes it to its logical conclusion. Whereas Locke and Berkeley hadn't been wholly consistent empiricists, Hume, the true believer, demonstrates that classical empiricism leads to a pretty thoroughgoing skepticism. Since he's wholly convinced of the truth of his empiricist premises, Hume is willing to accept the skepticism that goes along with them. However, those who aren't convinced of that his empiricism is obviously correct think that Hume has actually demonstrated the implausibility of his empiricism. If this is where empiricism leads, they think, then it's clear that we need to reject empiricism. Indeed, some, like Thomas Reid, view Hume's arguments as constituting a reductio ad absurdum of his sort of empiricism. On this interpretation, Hume's philosophy essentially presents a dilemma for all future thinkers: abandon empiricism, or accept empiricism along with Humean skepticism.

But a different view of Hume, one of Hume as proposing a wholly naturalistic account of the human mind, has recently emerged as a competitor to the general conception of Hume's place within philosophy sketched in the previous paragraph. This interpretation downplays Hume's skepticism and emphasizes his professed intentions to provide a positive account of the operation of the human mind that appealed to nothing beyond the evidence of our senses. According to proponents of this interpretation, Hume is most interested in a description of the operation of the human mind. He's describing what human nature allows us to know and what it doesn't allow us to know. Furthermore, he argues that our nature is such that, where it fails to provide us with the resources to acquire the knowledge we might want, it provides us with a natural habit of forming the right conclusions anyway. Even though our nature limits our knowledge of the world, it ensures that we possess the habits of mind needed to make our way in the world. Hume dubs all these habits of mind "custom."

If this view is correct, then Hume has abjured many of the normative aims of traditional epistemological inquiry. He isn't attempting to show how we can answer a skeptic or why we have good reason to believe what we think we know. Instead, he wants us to stand back from our everyday beliefs and think about the natural processes that result in them. How, exactly, do our minds operate? How do we come to think what we do about the world? Hume thinks that this sort of inquiry will lead us see that, at some point, the explanation of why we think what we think reaches certain brute facts about the operation of the human mind. When we reach these points, there is nothing more to be said. We simply can't help thinking in these ways, and we lack the resources to demonstrate that these ways of thinking constitute an accurate way to represent the operation of the external world. And, Hume claims, it turns out that many of the fundamental elements of our conception of the world--the belief that things stand in causal relations to one another, the belief that we can know that there is a world outside our minds, the belief the future will resemble the past--end up not being open to ratification by experience. With respect to beliefs of these sorts, we ultimately have to appeal to custom in order to explain their existence and popularity. Hume, then, can be seen as demolishing the pretensions of reason in order to make room for a wholly naturalistic account of human thinking.

First I would like to commend the excellent review of this book by CT Dreyer in which he correctly shows how Hume extended the empiricism of Locke and Berkeley to the point where skepticism seemed our only honest way of thinking about our knowledge of the world. Hume's questioning of induction, of how we can be sure tomorrow will be like today , his questioning of how we can trust our senses to know the outside world, his questioning of how we can hold our world logically together when analysis reveals that there is no necessary connection between ' cause' and 'effect' in everyday life action means he wakened not only Kant from his dogmatic slumber but Philosophy itself from the sense that it will provide absolute understanding.
Hume is a very clear writer. I remember reading the famous billiard ball account of causality in which our common sense view of ' before' and ' after' is questioned and taken apart. I believe Hume says after this account, something to the effect and ' still when we leave the room we leave by the door and not by the window'. A friend of mine in this class when the class ended opened the window ( on the ground floor ) and went out that way.
This is difficult and great philosophy. I do not pretend to understand it or its implications fully. A test of the mind and a necessary read for anyone who would know Western Philosophy.

Once I started reading the book, I could not put it down. I kept coming across places and people I knew and it brought back a lot of memories. I eventually supported several of his units with intelligence and map overlays for "sensitive" operations, and was in-country myself for six years. I had several run-ins with jerk officers but thankfully they were rare. But I did pull my .45 on three Pentagon O-6s at a SOG briefing when they refused to assist us. Luckily, an SF 1SG Deluca grabbed me and said they were not worth killing as they ran from the room. A couple of weeks later I was jerked out of VN and sent to Germany. I recommend this book to everyone who wants to know how close many of us got to the Vietnamese and the war, and I would very much like to be in contact with the author.

A well-written document by one of the troops on the ground. Crazy moments of a GI under stress, a good feel for the local hill people, and remembrances of buddies in the field. Some of the actions and soldiers described by Cornett have been written about by others and it is always good to see another version of events, not for differences but for shades and nuances to flavor the stories.

A personal growth story: A boy does good, does bad, then good again and manages to live through the process in a war that featured so many wrong decisions from higher and so many incompetent lower and mid-level officers more concerned with careers than with their men.

This was a good book to read. It gave a new perspective from "pre-military to post. I considered giving it 4 stars, but for an overall score, I thought 3 stars was more justified.

I can recommend Gone Native to anyone who is thinking about purchasing this book, but it is not a page burner and it seemed to ramble a little towards the end. But in no way would I want a perspective purchaser of this book to think it's not a good one. It is. He is frank and honest and what landed him in the stockade was quite refreshing. (You always hear about the other guy. Well, Cornett was the other guy. Thank you for your honesty.)

This was one of those books I didn't want to put down until I was done.

I have read hundreds of Vietnam nonfiction books and this is in the top 15 for sure. Great book and flows great, did not want it to end...

Thomas Nelson's Rutledge Hill Press publishing division has created a lovely book that tells a simple narrative of the Civil War focusing on the importance of maps in the war and the men who made them.

The cover of the book is designed to look like a leather bound canvas portfolio, much like a mapmaker's sketchbook of the era. The text of the book is beautifully printed on high quality paper. I appreciated the fact that the publishers included lots of pictures of everday soldiers - not just the same old posed shots of the generals and politicians.

There are 32 removable maps included as well. The removable maps are stored in between the pages. The publisher has printed on only one side of the thick paper pages and then glued the blank sides together on the edges to make an envelope of sorts between the pages. The maps are securely stored so there is no chance of accidentally losing a map.

I would not recommend this book as an introduction to the topic of the Civil War since it does precious little to introduce the issues that caused the war or Reconstruction. However, it is an attractive volume that would be welcome in the collection of any Civil War buff.

This book is beautiful and interesting - it's a definitely a great book to have!

My dad is a CIvil War buff and a former surveyor. He loved this book. It had a ton of maps he could take out and look at to go along with what he was reading.

We recently moved to North Carolina and our grandson, who has studied the civil war in school, was so excited to see this book. We are planning on taking him to the many sites this summer and this has given him the opportunity to read up before the trip. For his age this book was awesome.

Great Maps of the Civil War: Pivotal Battles and Campaigns Featuring 32 Removable Maps (Museum in a Book, 2)
I purchased this book as a Christmas gift for my dad, who is a big Civil War buff...it was a huge hit, especially since the maps could be removed, studied, then stored away safely again. This book is a definite 'must have' for anyone who enjoys studying the Civil War...

What a shame that books this worthwhile have to go out of print. In its quiet, unassuming way, I found this to be a classic work of animal-lover's literature. Like at least one other reviewer, I wondered whether I could get through the entire book after reading the first paragraph, which seems to be foretelling a tragedy. But I did, and instead shared something more like a triumph. I will never give up my copy of this book. I hope the used copies available here will be enjoyed by many more people.

"Home Waters" is a charming story about a fly fisherman and his dog. It is Monninger's memoir and tribute to his dog, Nellie, an eleven-year-old Golden Retriever, who he has recently learned has cancer. He decides to take a road trip from his home in New Hampshire to visit some of his favorite fishing spots in Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana. Monninger takes the reader along for the ride, describing the details of his fishing trips -- where he sets up, which type of bait he uses, how he adjusts his technique to the circumstances -- and how Nellie accompanies him in all he does -- how she sniffs at each stick and stone as she explores a new area, how she snuggles into his sleeping bag on cold nights, how she taught herself to dive under water after him. As he makes his way through the trip, he reminisces about earlier fishing trips and other experiences he and Nellie have shared.

I loved the tone of this book. Monninger has a pleasant, matter-of-fact way of telling a story. I especially liked how he conveyed his simple love and respect for Nellie just in the way he interacted with her and in his reports of their conversations: "I told Nellie we were done for the night. She seemed grateful." Or, "I told her she was a good dog." When Nellie encountered a harvested potato field, she gave her best shot at retrieving the hundreds of potatoes left on the ground, only to be defeated by the magnitude of the task. Monninger says, "I consoled her on the walk back to the truck, telling her we all have such days, then fed and watered her. I told her to lay down on her dog bed and she did." After he returns to his hotel: "When I unhooked Nellie's leash inside the room, she put her nose on the edge of the bed, asking permission to get up. I told her to go ahead, but not to hog the whole thing. She curled at the foot of the bed, tail to nose. I sat besider her and gave her a rub. In a little while she began to snore. I read for awhile, then turned out the light." I especially related to his dilemma when he went fishing at Yellowstone. "The hard part was explaining to Nellie it is against park regulations to take a dog into the back country.... Nellie wasn't pleased with it... and when I locked her in the back of the truck, she whined to come with me. I was firm with her and caved only enough to give her a biscuit." I've never been fly fishing, but I enjoyed Monninger's equally droll explanations of how it works, the strategy (and luck) that goes into it. I think I now understood why "the one that got away" haunts every fisherman.

Monninger uses all his senses in his prose. Unassuming details become necessary pieces of a fabulous story about a man's love for his best friend, one that can't verbally reciprocate the bond but shows an appreciation of the author through her patience and obedience. Bravo!

In this memoir, author Joseph Monninger recounts a very special fly-fishing trip with his best friend, eleven-year-old Golden Retriever, Nellie. Nellie has been diagnosed with cancer and Monninger decides to let the illness run its course- but not without one last grand encounter with nature. The pair traverse the country by pickup truck- camping, fishing and otherwise enjoying nature and the company of each other. This is a great book for those who fish because there are lots of references to the techniques and joys of fly-fishing.But the touching glimpses of the bond between man and dog, and of dealing with the curves life throws at us, add memorable depth and make this wonderful story of interest to everyone, fisher-person or not.

This is a wonderful story about the relationship between a man and his dog. I've never gone fly fishing but I found the descriptions quite interesting. I felt like I was with Joe and Nellie on their adventues. Very moving! I highly recommend this book to everyone even if you don't have a dog!

If you enjoy politics mixed with humor,then this book by Ken Berwitz and Barry Sinrod is the one for you. It is done in a nice point-counterpoint style with Ken taking the conservative stance while Barry takes the hopelessly liberal point of view. This book is a very good read and definitely worth your time!

I read this book in ONE day, actually..I followed my husband around reading it aloud to him! Its funny, insightful and perfect for this campaign season. The odd part is, its not ABOUT political issues, its about those who vote D or R and the differences in their personal lives.
A refreshing read now when most of politics is negative and nasty. These guys did a great job, however, even though I voted Democratic for many many years, I found myself enjoying Kens point of view the most. I recommend it especially for households where husband and wifes votes cancel each other out. It will brighten your day!

This is one funny book, with a real twist... It takes questions that are actually not that related to politics, but more personal, such as how often you take a bath or if you like the lights out during sex - and then they argue over the poll results of respondents who were either registered Democrats or Republicans. What a hoot! It's not only interesting but actually rather revealing about the personal nature of these two cultures, and frankly, (sorry, my liberal compatriots!) the Republican (Ken) has a lot more "real knowledge" here to offer than the Democrat writer (Barry), it seems. But only because this particular liberal Democrat seems to take an awful lot of energy and wasted time calling the Republican a lot of names. Barry also complains a lot outright, which comes across with rather a whiny tone - all the while providing a ton of stereotypical images from the 1970s instead of now - which by itself is rather funny. However if you're looking for any solid political comments, beware that the reader is left of flat on the Democrat's side. Barry's writing is always last, too, which usually sticks with the reader more, providing a "recency effect". Because of that, too often in this text that results in a bitter feeling reminiscent of a "Michael Moore" type of nutty remark from the Democrat side, which even conservatives might feel is perhaps too much of a cartoonish image of the "left". But this is more of a humorous book than a serious one, of course, so that makes it all the better. That being said, the political wisdom offered by Ken (the Republican writer)is more real and useful, but BOTH of these men are very funny! Someday, I'd like to see another book done... My wish would be that perhaps next time around, Ken Berwitz might get himself a more skilled debater, and take it up another notch, for some real, true political debate, about issues that are truly on the voting table for 2008. Somehow Ken seems to be able to do this without killing his writing partner, and that's amazing. This was a fun book and I'd recommend it to anybody for a good laugh!

This is one of the most clever books written on politics. It deals with both sides of the political ideologies. Your heart will tickle with laughter. In this era of political partisanship you will enjoy the information. There is something in the book for every political junky. Take the time to enjoy politics for a change and massage your brain with fun and laughter!

down in the dc metro area, this book is exactly what we need to break away from the day to day droning political analyses. a hilarious, smart and finally a unique way to view the differences between the 2 parties, it combines my favorite things - politics, psychology and humor. i've recommended it to everyone around here who takes politics too seriously or has been waiting for someone to acknowledge the humor in it all......fabulous!

First-person tales from the likes of Herman Badillo and Jimmy Breslin recall life here a half-century ago.

THE CITY HEARD

Words can conjure up places and times as vividly as pictures do, especially when people are speaking from the heart, fueled by intimate experiences and affectionate memories of a place.

It Happened In Manhattan stitches together anecdotes and recollections told by a disparate group of Manhattanites - from writers and architects to rabbis and restaurateurs - all steeped in the spirit of the city where they live and work.

Stretching from the close of World War II through the psychedelic 60s and beyond, the subjects of the recollections are equally diverse. Many of the chapter headings come from songs - "East Side/West Side," "Puttin' on the Ritz" - reflecting the writers' wish to celebrate their city as enjoyably as generations of entertainers have. They also note its dark and somber sides.

Imaginatively chosen photos round out the portrait capturing nostalgic moments or illustrating stories told on adjoining pages. Flipping through the book is like riding a time machine to one of New York's energetic eras.

Myrna Katz and Harvey Frommer's It Happened in Manhattan ... is an encyclopedic oral and visual memoir of life in New York from the end of World War II to the fiscal-stricken era of the mid-1970s. The Third Avenue El, Ebbets Field, the Automats, the Chelsea Hotel, the Fillmore East, and the pre-AIDS clubs of the swinging gay '70s can all be found here, along with accounts of the rise of abstract expressionist and pop art and Norman Mailer's mayoral race. This book captures a New York in transition, accelerating through the cultural changes of the 1950s and '60s from the world of Joseph Mitchell to the world of Tom Wolfe.

It Happened in Manhattan probably is the anti-book for unreformed New York haters. It revels in the story of Manhattan, a 22-square-mile borough in the city during the mid-20th century.
Interviews with more than 60 current and former residents of Manhattan tell a rich story of city life in the post-war era. The prologue, a monologue by Sid Bernstein, the music promoter who arranged the first Beatles's appearance in America, is wonderful.
"I'm still a tourist in the city I was born and raised in," says Bernstein. "I'm a walker of the city streets." Bernstein wanders and explores by his own north star: his sense of smell. "If I walk by a place and an aroma greets me, I go there."
There are plenty of food stories in It Happened in Manhattan. There is a lot more, of course. Sections deal with memories of growing up in Manhattan, of starting careers in finance and fashion, of finding sanctuaries in churches or museums. There are memories of restaurants, nightclubs, department stores, eateries, celebrities. People remember when they cleaned out a section of a restaurant for Frank Sinatra's posse, the early days of Bette Middler, described as colorful as a "Jewish parrot."
Tin Pan Alley, the Guggenheim Museum, Yiddish Theater, Walter Winchell, Harlem, Greenwich Village, escapees from the Hollywood blacklist - they're all in here, not in formal history, but in the memories of people who knew them.
Perhaps Manhattan expatriates will enjoy It Happened in Manhattan most, as there really is a lot of nostalgia in a book like this, but others can find many pleasures.
After all, even if we never go to New York, part of it come to us. It's that big a town.

Manhattan is a narrow island, only 22 square miles, but its history is much bigger. It Happened in Manhattan is an album of vintage photos and first-person reminiscences that form mid-century Manhattan. Ranging from the early post-World War II years to the mid-1970s, the book is an oral history constructed from dozens of interviews with New York luminaries such as Jimmy Breslin, Elaine Kaufman, Alan Greenberg, and Pauline Trigère, as well as everyday people like Rabbi Dan Alder, teacher Linda Kleinschmidt, and drugstore owner Joel Eichel. With chapters like "If I Can Make It Here..." about emerging celebrities, "Sanctuaries in the City" concerning religious communities, and "Politics As Usual," It Happened in Manhattan evokes an era when Checker cabs still passed down a two-way Fifth Avenue, when 11 daily newspapers covered the city beat, and when young women attended their Katharine Gibbs continuing education classes in hats and white gloves. Their reminiscences and perceptions are woven into a narrative that describes how New York became an international center in the wake of victory in the Second World War, and how the city was affected by new immigrants from Europe fleeing fascism and immigrants from the Latin America seeking opportunity. This was an era when soaring real-estate values led to the tearing down of whole neighborhoods, and when community activists rallied to save many architectural treasures. It Happened in Manhattan illustrates with personal details and anecdotes the passing of the Manhattan of the Industrial Age, how the city government almost went bankrupt, and how New York City survived and continues as a financial, political and cultural center of the nation. Father Peter Colapietro, pastor of Holy Cross Church on 42nd Street, offers his recollections:

As a kid, I always saw Sixth Avenue as the dividing line between the East and West Side. The East Side was Rock Center and St. Patrick's Cathedral; the West Side was the stuff on 42nd Street. It was like you needed a passport to go from one to another... Even though Manhattan was only a fifteen-cent ride away from where I lived in the Bronx, it was a whole new world. I felt I had to dress up to go down there. I couldn't wear jeans and a polo shirt. I was an eleven- or twelve-year-old, I knew what Playboy magazine was, but when I went into some of these stores on 42nd Street - wow! Ten or twelve of us used to come down to Herman's Flea Circus. It had an arcade with pinball machines, magic shows, and a famous Flea Circus. We would go to Rockefeller Center and see as many television shows as we could get into, getting there early to be first on line for shows like The Price Is Right, The Match Game, and Truth or Consequence. A warm-up person like Johnny Olson would ask the audience, "Anybody out there celebrating a birthday? anniversary? parole? We got to know the routine. Once my kid brother and I got a pair of handcuffs. When Johnny Olson got to "Anybody celebrating parole?" we raised our hands handcuffed to each other.

I received this book promptly and in excellent shape.
The seller is great as far as I'm concerned.
Charlene Kornblum

I grew up in a neighborhood and a time when "Impeach Earl Warren" signs were common. As an engaged teenager I closely followed the changing legal landscape of the late fifties and early sixties as the Warren Court rearranged the legal landscape and with it the social order of our nation in the areas of civil rights, criminal justice, freedom of speech, privacy and the role of religion in public schools. Even today as a practicing attorney I admit to strong philosophical disagreements with some of the Warren Court decisions. Having said that, Jim Newton has produced a masterpiece in his book "Justice for All."

First, this book is a marvelous biography of one of the most notorious men of the 20th century. From humble beginnings in the dusty backwater of a turn of the century Bakersfield, California to Chief Justice of perhaps the most influential court in the world, Earl Warren's story is compelling. In addition you are treated to a wonderful and readable history of California politics in the first half of the 20th Century, a time of unparalleled opportunity, growth and change in the Golden State. That alone is worth the read.

Nevertheless, the real gold nuggets of this book lie in its recounting of the internal politics of decision making within the court, as Chief Justice Earl Warren, guided not so much by legal principle but by what he perceived to be the "right thing to do", rewrote and redefined some of the most important constitutional issues of our time. While such a disclosure, poorly written might leaden the eyelids of all but the most inspired, Newton masters this task by writing a clear and easily understood layman's explanation of the facts, the legal and social issues and the courts resolution. I found myself excited, engaged and highly entertained by Newton's easily understandable prose. I was in a sense a fly on the wall as some of the most important legal decisions of the 20th century unfolded before my eyes.

Warren is not portrayed as a flawless Deity (he after all recommended and supported the forced incarceration of Japanese American's in WW II) but rather as a multi-faceted personality whose core belief was in using the power of government to do good for the common man and whose political and legal judgment evolved to blend with and sometimes challenge the social and legal fabric of our nation.

I was amazed to learn of his post Miranda concern (fueled by a very real and I would say predictable jump in crime in America after Miranda) that perhaps the court had gone too far in defining the relationship between those who would do harm and those who are ultimately charged with our protection. Thus while the basic concept of Miranda is appropriate and now fully integrated into the fabric of our legal system, later Supreme courts thankfully have more clearly defined the boundaries under which we balance the rights of the accused and the right of our citizens to be free from the terror of criminal activity.

OK enough politics, after reading this book, I am wiser, far better informed and far more sympathetic to a man so many have reviled as the father of judicial activism. Such a label in the absence of context does a huge disservice to this huge man and his historical significance. This book provides a context and insight that far surpassed my expectations. Regardless of your politics or your view of judicial activism, this is a truly enlightening book worthy of your time.

I rarely give a 5-star review on a book. This one gets one for a stack of reasons.

When I finish a biography, I ask myself if I feel like I know the person. I feel I know Warren.

Another reason to like this book, it makes no bones about Warren's bad decisions, his support of the uprooting of Japanese in California in 1941. The author is not shy about criticizing Earl Warren.

Finally, I am a layman. It is a tough task to explain complex legal decisions to a non-lawyer. But Newton does it quite well.

One other thought: After all the learning I did by reading this book, it makes me quite critical of any and all the "teachers" I had in government and American History. They could not teach a politician to steal.

This biography of Earl Warren is one of the few that uses the newley released sources on the Warren commission and other recent documents to add new insights into the life of the former governor and chief justice. The book beings with a look at Warren's life growing up in dusty Bakersfield California where his father worked on the railroad and life was very much a frontier town. After high school Warren went on to Berkley and became a member of the prestigious golden bear society which both his son and grandson would become members of.

Earl Warren served as a prosecutor and eventually a republican attorney general where he made a name for himself being tough on crime. The loss of his parents to murder and old age were severe setbacks in his life but helped shape his look on crime. Earl became a governor of the state at a critical time in its history and helped to usher in a new era of progressive government. Although he claimed to be a republican he was not a typical one of the time. He clung to his progressive roots and brought social reforms to California. Warren made several runs for the presidency and once was Dewey's running mate but the higher office would elude him for all of his life.

In order for Dwight Eisenhower to gain the nomination he was forced to make a concession to Warren that the first vacancy on the court would be his if he would throw his delegates behind Eisenhower. Warren agreed and the first vacancy to open up was that of Chief Justice. Warren proceeded to the court and brought his unique brand of progressive activism to the court to make some of the most pivotal decision to effect the country. The Miranda case, Baker v. carr, Brown, and many others would establish far reaching social changes that broke down the barriers of race and economic inequality leading to what Warren perceived as a more just society. The author does an excellent job of showing the interplay between the Supreme Court justices. The warren commission is also covered in very good detail although the author tries to hard to justify the role Warren played when it is obvious that the commission has come to the correct conclusion.

The book is very thorough and the only flaw I found was that it was incredibly proWarren to the point where he could do wrong. Earl Warren is a person to be respected and admired and his distinguished career does point to that but he is also human. The early cases where Warren used questionable tactics to gain confessions or his feud with Nixon do not make him a bad person they make him human. This is still an incredibly valuable book and does an excellent job of showing not only Warren's life but the social life of the times.

Jim Newton's biography of Earl Warren, "Justice for All", is a comprehensive and richly written book about one of the great Chief Justices in our nation's history. Warren, a moderately conservative man in temperament, style and often idea, led the Court through one of the most tumultuous times in recent memory. Revered and reviled as he might have been, his legacy is certainly one of notable accomplishments and Newton captures it well.

The author presents Earl Warren in a generally favorable light, reminding us of some of his catastrophic decisions, too....especially his support for the internment of Japanese-Americans during the Second World War. For a moderate, almost non-partisan Republican, Warren had terrific success as governor of California propelling him into the national limelight with only one real political miscalculation of consequence...his agreeing to be Thomas Dewey's Vice Presidential running mate in 1948. Here begins the real fascinating part of Newton's book...politics. Whether it was Earl Warren's tenure as governor, or later dealing with the many presidents he knew or the intricacies of the personalities on the Court, Newton is terrific at describing political process. As Warren was a Republican it was interesting to read that the three Republicans he knew who were or would become president...Eisenhower, Nixon and Ford....were ones with whom Warren had the most troubles. (The descriptions of Richard Nixon add some good humor to the book!) The Chief Justice thought the most highly of President Kennedy, we learn, and he at least got along reasonably well with Lyndon Johnson.

There are many court cases, of course, cited in this book. They are fascinating to read about, especially how often slim majorities hung in the balance, finally decided by Earl Warren's persuasive powers. Newton speaks a great deal about Warren's family and this is much to his credit...so often in these biographies families are put on the back shelf. Here, they are front and center. If I had one small negative thing to say it would be that as the book progresses the author's fondness for his subject becomes much more apparent. "Justice for All" never approaches a hagiography, but occasionally it appears headed in that direction. Other than that, Jim Newton has written a superlative book and I highly recommend it for two reasons....to remind those of us who remember Earl Warren of his towering presence as Chief Justice and for those too young to remember him but who want to learn more.