Charles Williams Books

I profited from this book because the authors and their research staff related interesting stories of companies and their battles with the IRS using sources such as newspapers and Tax Court transcripts, and I bought a cheap used copy. The research was thorough and I skipped some of the tedious details. But, I fear that many other readers will buy into the denunciation of capitalism espoused by the authors. If you haven't already read books explaining why capitalism in Hong Kong, Singapore, and Ireland creates many more happy and prosperous people than U.S. and European socialism, then you would profit more from reading books such as "The Capitalist Manifesto" or "Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal" or "The Sovereign Individual."

The authors believe that because "taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society," the U.S. should continue taxing 35% of the economy and regulating another 10-15%. Unfortunately for the U.S., Hong Kong will be as rich as the U.S. in 10 years if current trends continue, and Singapore will be as rich in 20 years. Benevolent government is a delicate balance between anarchy and despotism, and the U.S. has long since descended into an anarchic despotic state where most government activities involve gathering everyone into numerous groups who steal from everyone else; or protecting people from their own foolishness; or operating military bases in 130 countries or acting as a referee in their civil wars. The authors fail to recognize that only a minor portion of U.S. federal government activity benefits the general welfare such as protecting property ownership and other individual rights; and that a special interest group can have millions of members who benefit from government spending at others' expense.

The authors assume that since rich people own a disproportionate share of corporations, and corporations have been paying a smaller share of total taxes during the last 30 years, that the IRS should pursue corporations more energetically; and that doing so will alleviate the crushing tax burden of individuals that are not rich. They fail to recognize that not only rich people, but also many ordinary people own shares in their pension plans; and to a large extent corporations are tax collectors that transfers taxes to their customers, most of whom are ordinary people. Even corporations selling luxury items to the rich still employ workers who suffer when the IRS drives corporations to manufacture elsewhere.

The authors lament the emigration of rich Americans to countries with lower taxes and advocate enforcement of a law that would prevent emigrants from visiting the United States after they renounce citizenship. They falsely believe that rich people cannot happily live luxuriously permanently outside the U.S. and enforcement of the law barring their return would discourage many from emigrating; and refuse to recognize that rich people can enjoy many other countries. The few that would be successfully discouraged would be offset by the many who would spend their tourist money elsewhere. London has successfully attracted the spending and capital of foreign billionaires using a favorable tax structure, and the U.S. could compete by emulating the practice (and making the airport experience more enjoyable). Millions of Mexicans emigrate to the U.S., rich and poor alike, and Mexico welcomes their return not only for the tourism industry, but as a humanitarian gesture. Building a Berlin Wall around the U.S. would be as counterproductive as it was in Germany.

My best defense to the 5 star reviewers is that a congressman no less once said that "Taxes are a levy on ignorance." I also want to make very clear that I am against tax evasion, but wholeheartily endorse taking legal, above board tax deductions. I am sure that most legitimate business people would agree.

For the record, I have been in a zero tax bracket since 1991 and when I was an employee, was getting refunds on ssi.

By the way, how does it make you tax happy animals feel to know that your ssi contributions will never come back to you. Why do you suppose that congressmen and senators don't participate in ssi?

Calling this "left-wing propaganda" and other editorial commentary in some reviews really just proves the premise that as America slips into decline, the only 'wealth' being created is tax cheating schemes, along with 'no-down-payment' real estate speculating courses, and "privatization" of public property such as utilities, or government research. This book has the scoop on all the famous tax cheat schemes, and consumer warnings against get involved in them. But precious little recommendations on how to solve the problem. But the main message of the book is that making money in America is no longer about producing a product, or providing a service, but about cheating on your income tax. Pretty much the USA is on the road toward becoming a corrupt third world bananna republic, like Mexico.

Of course these taxes arent being paid! We've set up a system that allows it. The more complex a tax code is, the more exemptions that are allowed the more loopholes that are available to exploit. I seriously don't know why anyone would be shocked this happens.

The ironic solution to this mess, if you truely want to solve it, is to advocate a flat tax with no exemptions (maybe one) or a national sales tax and do away with national income tax.

If your concern is about the billions being wasted by the government over 50% of our budget is non-discretionary. That means congress can't touch it through yearly appropriation. That means it grows and grows and grows uncontrollably. This spending includes wealth transfers through welfare, corporate subsidies (WEalth transfer from poor to rich), and social security (poor to rich wealth transfer) to name a few. Ironically we spend billions to protect farmers the result of which is higher price for food and then billions more on food stamps so the poor can afford the higher priced food. Society as a result is hurt.

Well over 1 trillion is wasted in this manner...

"The Cheating Of America: How Tax Avoidance And Evasion by the Super Rich Are Costing the Country Billions-And What You Can Do About It" by Charles Lewis, Bill Allison, et. al., is a well-researched overview of how some of America's wealthiest citizens and corporations avoid and evade taxation.

"The Cheating Of America" tells us that at least $195 billion a year in taxes isn't collected from the ultra-wealthy.

This means the amounts collected from honest affluent people, middle-class earners, and low-income people are invariably higher. If all the rich paid their taxes, it's estimated the average taxpayer wouldn't have to pay thousands of dollars per year in extra taxes to make up the tax shortfall.

While $1.5 billion in new wealth is created every day in the U.S., we learn the number of full-time workers living in poverty has increased from 459,000 in 1998 to over 2.8 million in 2001.

A few of the issues:

--American companies legally open non-U.S. corporations to hold non-U.S. profits. But, these companies often engage in illegal pricing schemes to inflate their foreign profits at the expense of U.S. profits, effectively transferring taxable income to the foreign corporation.

In the 1950's, corporate taxes comprised 27% of the tax revenue. By the 1990's, corporate taxes only made up about 10% of the federal tax revenue. That's about a 2/3 decrease in corporate taxes. Individual taxpayers must make up the difference.

--Nonprofit Organizations operating businesses. The book estimates that non-profits control $1.3 trillion in wealth. While many nonprofits are legitimate, many aren't.

The authors write: "...the precedent for using the cover of benefiting mankind to avoid taxes has a long, rich tradition. ... Howard Hughes, for example, set up the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, which owned the stock of his aircraft manufacturing corporation. The nonprofit medical institute gave hardly any money to charity during his lifetime, unless one considers bankrolling the reclusive lifestyle of Hughes a charitable purpose."

Some of these nonprofits are lobbying organizations and industry promotional groups (For example, lobbying for deregulation and tax cuts).

--Corporate use of "phantom losses" from transactions that lack economic substance. The Cheating Of America does a good job of discussing the problems with international banking and how some companies create many entities to try to confuse the IRS. The secretive nature of some foreign country banks makes it nearly impossible for the IRS to obtain the records it needs to properly evaluate a business's tax situation. It's estimated that $10 billion a year in tax revenue is lost to this type of tax shelter.

For example, sometimes, some foreign bank will "loan" a wealthy individual money. That money is really taxable income in disguise. And, interest payments on the "loan" are sometimes reported as tax-deductible, if the "loan" is disguised as a mortgage or business loan.

--Wealthy individuals, renouncing American citizenship to avoid taxes, but continuing to spend hundreds of days per year in the United States. (In fairness to some of the tax ex-patriots, many also faced serious legal problems because they engaged in fraudulent activity. So, avoiding criminal prosecution or civil lawsuits could also be a motive for fleeing the U.S.)

So, what can the average American do about this? Not much. The Cheating Of America devotes a short five-page chapter to discussing what you can do. First, it points out you can't benefit from these tax-evasion schemes yourself, unless you have a lot of money.

Why can't the middle-class benefit from these methods? Because they were never designed to benefit the middle class. For example, the major source of income for most people is labor. If you work for somebody else, your wages are usually reported to the government. It's almost impossible to avoid paying taxes on money earned from work. The book does point out that many sole proprietors who deal in cash underreport their income, and the book recommends paying with a check to prevent these people from under reporting income. However, this doesn't affect most of the exceptionally wealthy.

What about depositing a small amount in a foreign bank? Your money might well disappear. These banks aren't regulated by U.S. law, and many are fronts for organized crime, terrorism, and other bad behavior.

Further, it's pointed out that the wealthiest individuals can afford the best attorneys in the world to defend them in tax court. They can tie the tax court up for 20 years with tens of thousands of documents. A few million in legal fees is chump change. And, they often purchase political influence. (A few million dollars contributed to the local community of a small country--and its officials--can do wonders for helping to avoid extradition.)

Trying to put pressure on politicians to enforce existing laws and enact laws that enforce tax fairness is one possibility. The authors say asking our politicians questions and demanding answers is a good start.

Overall, I highly recommend "The Cheating Of America: How Tax Avoidance And Evasion by the Super Rich Are Costing the Country Billions--And What You Can Do About It" to all people interested in learning about tax evasion by the rich.

The first of the bard's great Henry tetrology does not have the power or greatness of the its titular character to the extent that the latter plays have, but it still contains some of Shakespeare's greatest soliloquies. Richard II orates famously:
Of comfort no man speak:
Let's talk of graves, of worms, and epitaphs;
Make dust our paper, and with rainy eyes
Write sorrow on the bosom of the earth;
Let's choose executors and talk of wills:
And yet not so -- for what can we bequeath
Save our deposed bodies to the ground?
Our lands, our lives, and all are Bolingbroke's,
And nothing can we call our own but death,
And that small model of the barren earth
Which serves as paste and cover to our bones.

Richard the II is a tragedy about folly, about the farce of monarchical politics. It is clearly ahead of its time, though it falls short of the philosophical depth that Shakespeare would reach in such masterpieces as Hamlet and Macbeth. An indispensable part of the canon all the same.

Richard II was incompetent, wastefully extravagant, overtaxed his nobles and peasants, ignored his senior advisors, and lavished dukedoms on his favorites. His rival, Henry of Bolingbroke (later Henry IV), was popular with the common man and undeservingly suffered banishment and loss of all his property. And yet two centuries later Elizabethans viewed the overthrow of Richard II as fundamentally wrong and ultimately responsible for 100 years of crisis and civil war. Queen Elizabeth's government even censored Shakespeare's play.

Shakespeare masterfully manipulates our feelings and attitude toward Richard II and Bolingbroke. We initially watch Richard II try to reconcile differences between two apparently loyal subjects each challenging the other's loyalty to the king. He seemingly reluctantly approves a trial by combat. But a month later, only minutes before combat begins, he banishes both form England. We begin to question Richard's motivation.

Richard's subsequent behavior, especially his illegal seizure of Bolingbroke's land and title, persuades us that his overthrow is justified. But as King Richard's position declines, a more kingly, more contemplative ruler emerges. He faces overthrow and eventual death with dignity and courage. Meanwhile we see Bolingbroke, now Henry IV, beset with unease, uncertainty, and eventually guilt for his action.

Shakespeare also leaves us in in a state of uncertainty. What is the role of a subject? What are the limits of passive obedience? How do we reconcile the overthrow of an incompetent ruler with the divine right of kings? Will Henry IV, his children, or England itself suffer retribution?

Richard II has elements of a tragedy, but is fundamentally a historical play. I was late coming to Shakespeare's English histories and despite my familiarity with many of his works I found myself somewhat disoriented. I did not appreciate the complex relationships between the aristocratic families, nor what had happened before. Fortunately I was rescued by Peter Saccio, the author of "Shakespeare's English Kings". Saccio's delightful book explores how Shakespeare's imagination and actual history are intertwined.

I hope you enjoy Richard II as much as I have. It is the gateway to Henry IV (Parts 1 and 2) and Henry V, all exceptional plays.

Richard II is most likely Shakespeare's dullest and most obscured play. Of course, this is only the perspective of a sixteen year old student. It does seem however to be a common trend among many of the readers. This was just one of six required summer readings for my Advance Placement Literature course, and let me just state that under no other circumstances would I have read this book. And to tell you the truth, I didn't read the book. I purchased the audio cassette from "Amazon.com." After completing the tape for a second time, and only understanding a few words, I decided to get my hands on the book itself. The only difference that I could notice was my ability to distinguish who was saying what. I do not recommend this book to anyone without a Ph. D. Even to all of you literary geniuses, good luck! You will certainly need it to stay awake. I hope I was able to deliver a delightful and ever so typical sixteen year old's response.

This is in reguard to the Durkin-Hayes recording. How the actors and director could ever believe they were doing justice to Shakespeare is beyond me. A play that should run at most two and a half hours unabridged, is drug out to a laborious 3 hour cut-and-slash abridgement. The halting monotone quality of the actors speech is, to say the least, tedious. Maybe there are some worthwhile moments on the second tape, but I couldn't make it past the first. For my own part this recording was a huge waste of money.

My only complaint about this play is that Shakespeare should have had some dialogues where the characters discussed crucial history before the play opens. Gloucester (murdered or dead before the play but mentioned several times) had tried to usurp Richard's crown too many times. History itself is not sure if Gloucester died or was murdered. Bolingbroke for a while conspired with Gloucester and now sees another oppurtunity to usurp the crown.The virtuous John of Gaunt served Richard with honor and integrity and eventually moved parliament into arresting Gloucester for treason. This would of made John of Gaunt's rages all the more valid. Otherwise this play is outstanding! Richard shows himself to be capable of ruling at times, but gains our contempt when he seizes his the honorable John of Gaunt's wealth. John of Gaunt's final rage in 2.1 is a passage of immense rageful beauty. Also, Shakespeare moves us into strongly suspecting that Richard had Gloucester murdered. However, despite Richard's crime, Shakespeare masterfully reverses our feelings and moves us into having deep pity for Richard when he is deposed. The Bishop of Carlisle (Richard's true friend) provides some powerful passages of his own. I can not overestimate the grace in which Shakespeare increases our new won pity for Richard when Bolingbroke (Gaunt's rightful heir) regains his wealth and the death of Gloucester is left ambiguous. 5.1, when Richard sadly leaves his queen and can see that Henry IV and his followers will eventually divide is a scene of sorrowful beauty. 5.4 is chilling when Exton plots Richard's murder. 5.5 is chilling and captivating when Richard dies but manages to take two of the thugs down with him. The icing on the cake is that Bolingbroke (Henry IV) can only regret his actions and realize that he has gotten himself into a troublesome situation. But that will be covered in "1 Henry IV" and "2 Henry IV." We can easily argue that it is in "Richard II" where we see Shakespeare's mastery of the language at its finest.

This is quite the worst OO book that I have come across. The presentation of OO principles is very confused, and even wrong in some key areas. The approach to use cases clearly comes from a distant planet - "It's a use case Jim, but not as we know it!". The title of the book is extremely misleading. As for the software engineering process presented herein - NOOOOOO! You CAN'T be serious! The process is just byzantine in it's complexity!
A friend of mine sent his copy of this book back to the publishers and got a refund. I wish I had!

I worked for a company where Putnam Texel was an OO process consultant just prior ro her writing this book. What a horror. We were getting all focused on producing these idiotic design artifacts but never actually were gaining any real understanding of the system we were trying to design. She was all process but never really conveyed the real methods of thinking that are essential to OO analysis and design. Don't even waste you time with this book.

Well I guess a title like this helps sales but it's a pity there is so little content to support it.

Anyone looking for some great use-case technologies will be sorely disappointed. And the process and project management content is stifling, cumbersombe and dated. There are many far more exciting, modern and lightweight alternatives than this mess.

This book is to difficult for OO-novices and too easy for advanced OO-practicioners. It has 450 pages approx. but most of it are just programming listings which are of no use to anybody

Definitely not for novice developers, this book presents a respectable starting point for OOAD practices. Though some text/techniques did look dated; the approach, deliverables, phases were well covered and can definitely be used for mid-sized OO projects. The phases are well-explained alongwith important elements like pragmatic issues, entry-exit criteria.

For those attempting to bring more structure to their development process, this book's utility can be enhanced with knowledge of design patterns, and previous OOAD experience. One can certainly modify / improve the various deliverables covered in the book to their own needs.

I do wish for a better title and singular focus on UML, now that it is a standard. The code listings can surely be reduced and made more up-to-date. Some basic Java dev guidelines (like package names in lowercase) have been ignored.

Dale Brown can't decide what he wants to do: Either be a military writer, or be a fiction writer. Frankly, in both arenas, he fails. Quite miserably. There is virtually no plot development in this book, and the endless drudgery of military and technological description becomes mind-numbing, even to the most adherent military fiction fans. His writing is far from fluid, rather he utilises a blocky, counter-intuitive way to write, which makes this book doubly hard to get through.

He attempts to formulate some sort of character development between Daren and Rebecca Furness, both characters in this novel. Rather than adding dimension, however, it merely makes the characters even more cardboard-y: All Brown seems good at is describing missiles and aeroplane fuselage. Which is fine, if you're writing a military guide. And not so fine if you're writing fiction.

The premise of the story is simple enough: Taliban fighters are invading Turkmenistan. In the great name of Clancy, Brown can't help but to throw in some malevolent Russian forces to take a low jab at our Gulagian friends. Additionally, he throws a General (P. McLanahan) into the mix, a General who has faced his share of trials and tribulations, as well as military drama. Finally, there is a political twist: There are two candidates running for presidential office of the United States.

Truth be told, though, after five hundred+ pages of this book, and upon its finishing, I couldn't help but ask: What, exactly, happened? One never finds out the outcome of the political race, you don't quite find out what happens to any of the characters besides in their military circumstances...The characters accesorize the guns, rather than vice-versa.

It seems that Brown tries to do too many things at once, and as a result, doesn't even marginally succeed at any of them. I bought this book as a 'beach read' and figured I'd blow through it in about three days. Wrongo. It took me upwards of two weeks to finally finish it. The novel drags its feet in all the wrong places, and doesn't have any real plot development. I'm *not* looking for a literary masterpiece in the name of "The Red Badge of Courage," I was simply looking for an entertaining read.

Not really worth your time, unless you like to read an aircraft manual thinley veiled with what seem to be the threads of a plot line.

Like many reviewers I have read all of Dale Brown's books. But these last few seem to be the same thing over and over. General Patrick McLanahan disregards orders and saves the day. I am just getting a little tired of the plot always involving The President and his administration threatening/demoting/giving McLanahan a cold cup of coffee or whatever.

I also agree with a previous reviewer that there really isn't much suspense at the end, you know the high tech weapons will easily save the day. Its hard to connect psychology with high tech weapons, the humans seem to play second fiddle. Finally I have a really hard time with a Taliban hero.

I've read every Dale Brown book published. This is not the same old Dale Brown we are used to. Hope it gets better from here, or I am done.

Having read several Dale Brown novels now, I'm tiring of his incredible attention to technical detail and seemingly too little effort in developing a story line. Air Battle Force takes way too much time telling us every detail of every tank, fighter plane and computer system while leaving the reader waiting and waiting for something to develop amongst the characters.

I'm also wondering how much more he plans to wring out of the Dreamland story with its fancy, tech-stuffed bombers and Tin Men.
If you want a far more intriguing read still full of lots of airplane and fighter action, read James Huston.

G Sinclair

I've read every single one of Mr. Brown's books and this one is by far the weakest. Still good though but not his best. It was nice to see old characters like General Furness and Colonel Mace. But Thorn has to go. Hopefully he gets ousted from office in the next book. The plot in this one is kinda a weak but it seems to set up the next book nicely. (A war with Russia?) The robot planes are totally unbelieveable though. It breaks my heart to see Mr. Brown, a former navigator himself, take the real heros out of the picture. Whats the fun in flying if your gonna do it from the ground? A lot seems to be missing from Air Battle Force. But hopefully its just a set up for the next one.

Great guide to using Herbs instead of drugs. Aso shows which herbs NOT to mix together. I use it often as a reference and guide

This book is very useful - in one way. It describes the darker side of herbs. The fact that you shouldn't take ginseng if you are taking insulin is a fact little known by many, including unprofessional herbalists. However, the entire book is about the dangers of the plants - the "suspected" medicinal values are listed in a tiny sidebar, yet the authors go into enormous detail about side effects, interactions and dangers. This information needs to be known, as it is important, but the book is negative in every aspect. It seems more than anything that the authors are trying to discourage the use of herbal medicine.
This book is not a reference for herbal medicine, nor will it tell you how to use the herbs for medicine. But it is good information to know.

I am an avid user of herbs for medicinal purposes and found this book to be very informative but not at all complete. It is missing a few key herbs that are used in many daily meditation practices.

A COUPLE OF POINTS ARE MADE BY OTHER REVIEWERS I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS. LINKING PHARMACISTS TO THE GREEDY, UNSCRUPLOUS PHARMACEUTICAL MANUFACTURERS IS DOING MOST PHARMACISTS AN INJUSTICE. MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES ARE WILLING TO USE ANY REMEDY TO PROVIDE OUR PATIENTS RELIEF FROM THEIR SYMPTOMS, PROVIDED IT HAS BEEN PROVEN SAFE AND EFFECTIVE. PROVEN IS THE KEY WORD HERE. THERE HAVE BEEN MANY WELL RUN AND DOCUMENTED STUDIES PROVING THE BENEFITS OF MANY HERBAL PRODUCTS BUT FOR EVERY ONE OF THOSE THERE SEEMS TO BE 6 OR 8 THAT ARE POORLY DESIGNED, OFFER ANECDOTES RATHER THAN PROOF, OR COME TO DUBIOUS CONCLUSIONS. THAT SAID, JUST BECAUSE A STUDY IS NOT SCIENTIFIC DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE HERBAL REMEDY IS NOT HELPFUL. AS A HEALTH PROFESSIONAL WE MUST ERR ON THE SIDE OF CAUTION... "FIRST DO NO HARM...". FOR A MORE BALANCED, MORE COMPLETE PICTURE SEE THE AUTHORS' WORK ENTITLED "PROFESSIONAL'S HANDBOOK OF COMPLEMENTARY AND ALTERNATIVE MEDICINES".

This book was one of the few I first purchased when beginning my walk with herbs and natural healing. The introduction clearly states that herbs are a useful medicine, with Avila and Fetrow explaining why this is so, backing up their opinion, and stating why herbs have been turned away from.

Regrettably, their opinion seems to change once you actually read past the introduction.

95% or more of the book is a standard reference, listed alphabetically by herb. Every herb is discussed very, very briefly - this is a minimal reference guide at best. A paragraph is devoted to the herb, then a list of its use, then side effects, then the ending warning. That's it, really. It seems more like this is an herb-warning book than an actual herbal, as the bulk of the page will consist of cautions/warnings/contradictions, and not actual use of the herb.

Amusingly herbs are mentioned that every herbalist knows not to take without being extremely experienced, as the plants are poisonous. This book does not really mention that, instead making it appear like people and herbalists use these poisonous plants all the time and shouldn't. When it is recommended that an expert be consulted, very rarely does it say, "consult your herbalist or naturopath". Instead it's primarily "consult your physician."

I echo the reviewer who states they list any possible side effect, like 1 in a billion. You can read side effects here that won't be mentioned anywhere else, no matter how long you look. They also don’t seem too fond in listing that some of these side effects are extremely rare, or common in almost every pharmaceutical drug out there – such as nausea, headache, - or that the symptoms can be mild. Even herbs which list almost zero side effects, WITH research listed that backs them up, they still find a way not to recommend it! They may say, while research shows this moderately works and is generally safe, you can try a prescription drug that works better. Seriously! It’s a no win situation! To top even this off, they state in many herbs that no research exists, while I know for a fact there are studies out there.

Sometimes wording is effective brain washing. The first herb mentioned, Aconite, is toxic. It has been used by people in the past to commit suicide, as has every other poisonous substance. Yet they did not word it that way. Instead, “In fact, this herb was once used as a poison in arrows and has been linked to many suicides.” Linked how, as in causing them? Is this a warning against the herb, as if the suicides are the herbs fault? Even in Aloe Vera, they say that studies indicate Aloe may be useful for healing, but are quick to point out in the same sentence that studies aren’t well documented. And of course the standard follow up with the FDA recognizing the herb as generally safe, but not recommending it for any condition.

In the beginning of the book under general precautions, they state that one should not take any herb during pregnancy and that one should not take any herb for any serious condition. It would difficult to find many herbalists, homeopaths, naturopaths, or other natural care providers who agree with the above statements. Books have been written on pregnancy and childbirth involving herbs alone, and research really HAS been done. Claiming they shouldn’t be used for any serious condition is dismissing them as folklore, right up front, intended only to try on mild, harmless sniffles and bruises. It creates a mind set; a subtle one, but still a mind set.

I didn’t get the recommendation to never take an herbal cocktail, as they call it, where more than one herb is in a formula. They claimed experts don’t know how herbs mix. (?) Which experts? Surely not experts who study phytomedicine or other non-biased research in combining herbs. As most pharmaceutical companies seem to be trying to push to promote ‘drug based herbs’ they can have control and profit over, standardization is recommended in products bought. For some strange reason, it also says not to buy products over the internet, in magazines, brochures or broadcast media. Do they think Walmart grows and does their own herbs, or other natural stores? From my experience, most of the “supplements” sold in those places are the lesser quality found anywhere.

The book finishes with a few indexes of natural health supplements, including royal jelly, bee pollen, shark cartilage, etc, and recommends not to use any of these. One of the biggest slaps in the face was their stating on bee pollen never having conclusive research; it is amazingly simple for anyone to type in the words bee pollen research, or something similar, and pull up countless supportive studies.

Sadly, this book is written by pharmacists and it shows. If the pharmacist were not bias, I would welcome his/her contribution, but this is - again - not the case. It almost seems like people are hired by the drug companies to pen herbals to subtly sway people away from seeking out natural healing remedies. This should be one of the bibles for those kinds. One of my favorite things to look forward to in an herbal is personal experience a clinician has had, and of course none is found here. I would doubt the authors use many herbs at all.

All this being said, there are redeeming points here and there on this book. Some of the side effects really do exist and it is nice to see a book not run from listing a potential reaction of an herb. Some books praise plants so much they almost seem afraid of listing real contradictions and issues that can be found with them. This book also discusses a very large amount of herbs, a welcome change from those that discuss "30" or less. Each herb had a great wrap up, listing other names it's known by and commercial products it is sold as. AND, finally, the book is very reasonably priced.

If you are interested in herbs and just starting out, I recommend a much less biased book, something that's actually fair and not so one sided. This one doesn't go into enough detail on any herb - what it does and why, or any credible personal usage - and it doesn't take the time to explain much else. It's a good reference for those who are looking for a list of side effects and precautions, and that already know a little on herbs and have other herbals lining their shelves, but that’s it as a bare minimum.

It need more summary and definition of key term

I highly recommend "Social Psychology" to practically any adult who can read. We are social beings and understanding each other helps us to create better relations. A better world. This book is excellent to examine and understand not only others' behavior but also ours.

Here is an excerpt that caught my attention: "how we interpret, analyze, remember, and use information about the social world-suggests that we are far from perfect in our ability to think clearly about other persons and reach accurate decisions or judgments about them."

"Social Psychology" covers many branches of psychology but the chapters give you enough information to learn just the basics. I think that this is great for lay people or new students in Psychology. I found that the personal stories that both authors used, helped me to better understand the topic of the chapters; however the, I met this psychologist and have been friends with since, led me to believe that this reaction was due to a schema. Perhaps our society has created a schema in which others' names define who we are. I particularly don't sympathize much with this.

The colorful pictures and cartoons in the book, I enjoyed greatly. I tend to be very visual in many occasions. In fact, I feel that many of the pictures were more thought provoking than the text. I found them very helpful to understand the subject. I also sensed that the targeted audience was mainly young students since many of the studies were conducted or focused on young students. I just wished that the authors had not forgotten that there are older people (like this book reviewer) who go back to school or who want to learn about social psychology. Once again, I highly recommend this book to anyone. You'll learn to view the world under a new perspective.

I read several chapters from this book before I took a social psychology course, and saw that it was indeed very helpful. The author uses a lot of examples, which makes the concepts understandable. Also, the narrative text of the book is very high in quality according to me. It's pure, understandable, friendly and in harmony. (Look at the Franzoi's 1st edition: You will understand what I mean by no-harmony). I strongly believe that to write such a good book should have taken much time for the author. In addition, the author most probably had had an empathetic approach to understand the needs of the student and write accordingly. I don't mean to harm or criticize in any way those that made negative comments on this book. Nevertheless, let me convey you my opinion. According to me, using "I", the author only intended to provide a warm atmosphere to the student sharing his experiences and understandings. But, this is a way to encourage the student think of his/her own experiences in real life, which causes the assimilation of the knowledge more effectively. It's not to advertise himself(author), as far as I perceived from the book. Another thing is that, in psychology, phenomena that seem not logical to a human eye may be significant in a statistical sense. Very small differences, after the elimination of the error margin, may still be significant and therefore, meaningful. In the book, there are graphs not starting from the 0 point, and thus the difference may appear larger when looking superficially. Nonetheless, when looking carefully, undoing the illusory magnification, still the difference is observed, and I believe that the author made focus on the significant part of the graph to draw the attention of the reader and to make him understand better and easier. According to me, this is a good feature of the book and intention of the author.

As a university psychology instructor who favors a text demonstrating good science, I appreciate the careful documentation of research contained in this book. I also appreciate the personal touch of the anecdotes at the beginning of each chapter as a way of making the subject matter relevant to students. The authors do a masterful job of presenting a complex field, such as social psychology, to the college student. Teaching psychology as a science is a real challenge today and this text offers instructors a powerful tool for that purpose.

I make specific what book this is a review of, because if you look at the user reviews for Shelly Taylor & D. Sears' social psychology textbook, you will find the exact same 5 reviews as are below mine. Either Amazon or some user are up to something sneaky.

Despite the comments below, which may or may not reflect someone who has actually read or used the book, my comments are based on using this book when I took the course and ordering it for a course I am teaching this summer.

Regarding the infractions cited below, I have not found this text any worse than others. It covers a wide range of an exciting subfield of psychology, and it does so in a way accessible to an initiate to the field. Allyn and Bacon provide excellent support for the text, as well.

Finally, I wish to note that while I am currently working in the same Psychology department as Donn Byrne, the second author, we are not affiliated in any way.

The book would make a good movie. It is the period of the Vietnam war and some of the resulting instabilities have affected the students at a Catholic seminary near Decorah, Iowa. An approximately eight year attempt by a priest, Marbury, to feed the hungry, house the homeless has left him on the brink of a nervous breakdown. Traveling in Pennsylvania he experiences a sort of epiphany, emerging without a voice, but with the power to heal. A church investigator, Peter Whitmore, a fellow seminarian twenty years earlier, undertakes an investigation for the Bishop. Marbury is about to be defrocked, it would seem.

The story concerns moral obtuseness and spiritual blessedness in a mix of past and future events in the parallel routes of the investigator and the investigated. The condition of muteness underlies the theme of indeterminancy comprising the plot.

I say reluctantly, because the ends of sections and paragraphs were so formulaic in their withholding of information that it got a little too predictable in style; nevertheless, the content was indeed always unexpected and interesting. I was drawn to this book when I heard a review of it on NPR mainly because of the topic of sign language. Unfortunately, however, the author lets you forget that the main character's friend is signing when they communicate, using the words 'he said' instead of 'he signed'. Not that I think this should be easy, I was just hoping for more description of the visualness of his words, or its affect, and not a constant translation into English. I am curious about what Calia's experience is with Deaf culture, the real 'owners' of sign language, and what drew him to create a mute character who signs. Overall, this book was of course a good read, but I was reluctant to recommend it to my boyfriend (a sign-language interpreter). Aside from the this, I found Calia's depictions to be wonderfully mysterious and very intriguing and was unable to put the book down.

Calia is a masterful wordsmith. Admittedly, however, this work is not meant for all (therefore may not become overly popular) Its profundity may not be picked up by readers who have not witnessed or experienced some of the internal conflicts and reconciliations presented through the characters of Marbury and Whitmore. Like Wagner's "Ring", I predict we'll find many subtle and interlacing themes, barely connectable by readers who look only for the obvious in writing, but there for those that don't, in future works by this writer.

This is a novel about faith, friendship and forgiveness, compelling subjects all. I thought Calia was on to something in the early set up of The Unspeakable, for the first 50 pages or so make very taut reading. Pretty quickly, however, the two protagonists grow wearisome in their cat and mouse dialogue about their shared histories and the healings taking place in a parish that ministers largely to the deaf. Also, Calia cheats too often by withholding key bits of information, trying to make them more significant or surprising than they are. Sub-plots -- both in the present and the past -- abound, way too many for a novel barely 200 pages long, and many of them play out too patly and abruptly. Not sure I'd want either one of these guys for my priest. And why, I wondered throughout, is the Church's hierarchy so determined to discredit the faith-based healings that the mute Father Maybury seems to inspire?

For a much better rendering of the mysteries of faith and its effect on those who witness its workings, check out Mariette in Ecstasy by Ron Hanson.

The book deals with two priests, one (Marbury) who has become mute after an experience in a Pennsylvania snow storm, the other (Peter) sent to investigate reports of healing in Marbury's congregation.

I found the concept interesting and thought this could have been a great story, but was very disappointed. The possibility of doing something very interesting with signing and deaf culture was lost. Calia constantly allowed to us forget that Marbury was mute, or reminded us in clumsy fashion ('His voice trailed off, or rather his signs'). All the conversations were stilted and obvious. I wonder if Calia really has any experience with deafness.

The depictions of poverty were shallow. The writing was often self-conscious. But what I most found disappointing was that I felt no faith from either man. I have read books where the faith of the characters was evident. This was not one of them. If I am to believe that Marbury's experience in Pennsylvania changed him, Calia needed to make me believe that Marbury had a deep faith. I didn't.

OK read, some new history but could have been better edited. Still any History written about this time period and about these men is always a pleasure to read.

After reading Joseph Ellis' devotion to the subject in "Founding Brother's" I was looking forward to reading Cerami's book devoted to the subject of the famous dinner of Jefferson, Madison, and Hamilton. However after reading this book I was extremely disappointed. The book is a rehash of events with little space actually devoted to the dinner. Cerami has not broken new ground here (maybe with his in depth and drawn out discussion of Jefferson's dinner habits and menu), devotes little to the actually dinner, and spends the rest of the book rehashing the old story of the Hamilton/Jefferson/Madison fued.

On top of that the scholarship is terrible. Readers would be best served going to Cerami's bibliography and reading the materials, especially since Cerami seems to believe that footnoting is a waste of time (none at all in the book). Furthermore the book is filled with assumptions that Cerami doesn't back up with evidence. On top of all this, he constently repaeats himself over and over again as if doing so makes his points better. By doing all of this Cerami seems to be attempting to capture a broader audience, but instead he has turned his book into questionable scholarship at best.

There are other issues with this book. His constant references to Jefferson's last letter to Washington being "friendly." Yet where Cerami fails here is any discussion of the fact that Washington had learned Jefferon had stabbed him in the back with his "Sampson" Letter," and Jefferson's final letter was more of an attempt to make a mends than a friend writing to another friend (especially when more evidence shows that Washinton no longer considered Jefferson a friend...a fact that Cerami leaves out of his book). Cerami devotes 4-5 pages to Hamilton's affair with a married woman, yet off handedly mentions Jefferson's relationship with Sally Hemings. Cerami paints a picture of President Jefferson holding on to Federalist in his admistration as if it were some move out of the kindness of his heart, failing to even address (and more and more facts have surfaced) the deal Jefferson made with Federalists to get break the dead-lock between him and Burr.

Do yourselves a favor, buy Founding Brothers: The Revolutionary Generation read Ellis' chapter devoted to the subject and avoid this book.

Many of us remember John F. Kennedy's now famous comment to a gathering , "I think this is the most extraordinary collection of talent, of human knowledge, that has ever been gathered at the White House - with the possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone. "

History corroborates Mr. Kennedy's estimation of Jefferson's mental acuity but it does not recount how often Jefferson dined alone. Fortunately, what it does relate is the story of an evening when Jefferson hosted two guests for dinner - Alexander Hamilton and James Madison. This was a momentous time in our nation's history, and that evening is faithfully recalled by author/historian Charles A. Cerami in Dinner At Mr. Jefferson's.

In 1790 Jefferson evidently decided to resolve differences and perhaps the best way to do it was over excellent food and fine wines. To that end he invited Hamilton and Madison to dinner. The host was correct - during that meal bargains were struck: the Federal government would be responsible for Revolutionary War debts, which pleased Hamilton, and the capital would be moved, which pleased Jefferson and Madison.

While the crux of the evening is well known what delights is Cerami's description of those hours as he not only imagines the conversation but includes recipes for dishes served and notes wines enjoyed.

A remarkable reading by voice performer William Dufris literally transports the listener to that eventful dinner. The winner of thirteen Earphones Awards and voted a "Best Voice at the End of the Century" by AudioFile magazine, he delivers an estimable narration.

- Gail Cooke

....how our Nation's Capital ended up in a malarial swamp? It's a heck of a story, and, as with much else, Thomas Jefferson is central to it....

Several serious problems faced our nation in its early days, one of which was a massive debt burden, and declining confidence in our credit on the part of European bankers. What to do? Alexander Hamilton, a thoroughly brilliant but unpleasant little man had a plan, and he had the ear, and full confidence, of George Washington. As Secretary of the Treasury, he pretty much could do as he liked. His personality made enemies, even among his own faction, like John Adams. [Parties weren't fully developed]. But, his main opposition came from Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson and Congressman James Madison. Hamilton wanted the new federal government to assume state debts from the Revolution; Madison and Jefferson feared centralization of federal power [and Virginia had paid its debts, anyway].

Alongside this, there was the problem of where to put the new Capital city, and whether to build one from scratch, or use an existing city. New York, and Philadelphia, each had partisans, and various sites were under consideration. A site on the Potomac [which eventually won] had many friends, but there were those who said that George Washington would personally profit [he did].

Jefferson became worried about our credit problem, and decided to give Hamilton what he wanted. He had to make Hamilton think he was "putting one over", and thus had to make him give up something. On June 19, 1790, Jefferson invited Hamilton and Madison to dine with him the next day. Jefferson always spent too much; he had spent way too much remodling a temporary rental in New York, and lavished on food. But, he gave a fine dinner, at which Hamilton pledged to get his New York friends to support the Potomac site, and Madison agreed to quit fighting assumption. The rest is history......

Hamilton was eventually to ruin himself in an illicit affair [with Maria Reynolds], and Jefferson went from glory to glory [broke, however]. Madison, for all his greatness, remains a shadow to us. This fine book will give you a good glimpse of the time they all worked together. The parts about Senator William Maclay are enlightening; we owe this largely forgotten man much. The recipes from Jefferson's kitchen are a nice touch; my chef son says they're all doable with a minimum of effort, and cost. Despite an astounding ability to tolerate contradictions, Thomas Jefferson regretted his part in this whole matter for the rest of his life; still, this volume tells a fascinating story, and tells it well.

Having enjoyed the recent profusion of books on the founders, including Mr. Cerami's excellent Young Patriots, I was disappointed by his work here.

For starters, the book offers very little that's original or unfamiliar. In essence, it assumes no foreknowledge of the founding period, so it spends most of its effort rehashing narratives that have been well-told by others (Joseph Ellis, John Ferling, Gordon Wood, David McCullough, and the author himself) within the last handful of years.

A more serious flaw was the author's willingness to brush by questions that didn't fit his narrative. At one point for example, he simply states in passing that "George Washington was not a racist". Oh really? I'd say that at the least, the question deserves greater consideration than that.

Finally, I take issue with his casual editorializing. In the midst of a narrative, he'll frequently refer to one of the principals as sneaky, haughty, or the like. It feels both sloppy and judgmental.

In conclusion, while I recognize that certain stylistic choices have to be made if a history book is meant to appeal to a popular audience, I don't feel that Dinner at Mr. Jefferson's succeeds on any level.

I found a lot of useful question information, but this book is now outdated. Copy I received was in good condition but was from 1996.

If your planning to take the florida examination I highly recommend this study guide to assist you in your preparation. It covers all the necessary areas and provides questions to help you research the areas you need to have knowledge of.

Make sure you get a copy with UPDATES. Otherwise you might get outdated information. Don't substitute this review guide for hard study for the exam. Practice the excellent sample questions as many times as you can prior to the test. Study and test-taking tips are good. Discussion of the format of the exam is good. Needs to be updated re: App. and FDLE info via Internet.

This book covers all areas that one would expect to be on the state exam....five years ago. Now, in 2005, I recently took the state exam and questions in this book are nothing like what is on the real deal. Reason being, is the book is traditional based, whereas you will be taking a CMS based test. The two are completely different and this book should NOT be relied on to accuratly portray the CMS based testing. Don't waste your money, find an alternate and more accurate study material.

it was long boring and down right stupid dont get it

Many, many illustrations and excellent text make this a must-read for any devotee of New Mexico and Taos painting. I have a copy of the author's bought in a used book store; Amazon lists it as 'limited availability', so if interested you ought to order one soon.