Black and White Books

I would venture to guess that the majority of those who have given negative reviews have been white.

How often I have heard similar criticism by whites whenever a person of color or other minority presents a point of view that challenges their perceptions of themselves as heroic and ideal.

I think we all need to take the time to understand the underpinnings of racism in America. Problems don't just disappear because we ignore them.

Before you read this book, know that the author is a stand-up comic. He slyly presents his opinion as researched fact and draws conclusions based on these "facts." Rajen Persaud begins with a supposition--black men "love" white women--that may have been backed by some study that some sociologist has already conducted but is absent from this text; in the end, we just have to believe him. That's page one. Persaud continues the trend of faux-scholarship, trashing Phillis Wheatley's historical worth based on ONE POEM and painting Condoleezza Rice as a traitor to the African American community simply because she studied Russian. He calls Alan Keyes a "self-serving ingrate" for describing slavery (not the American history of slavery, but slavery in general) as "in violation of the fundamental premise of human dignity... not a racial issue." Valuing black lives over those of others is inherently racist, Rajen Persaud--shame on you. The author seems unsure whether this book is supposed to be a scholarly work or a work of humorous observation like that of Chris Rock or Richard Pryor, who are cited frequently. The biggest difference between Rock and Pryor and Persaud is two of them are funny, and the other one wrote this book. Unfortunately, "Why Black Men..." is either a sociological study that doesn't hold up to basic principles of proof and argument or a funny book that, frankly, is too pretentious (and un-funny) to be comedic. Rajen Persaud doesn't know which it is, and neither do I.

The title "Why Do Black Men Love White Women?" is only an attention grabber for a 264-page rant. Understand before going in that the author's opinion was the major source of fodder for this book--don't let the wealth of fancy quotations fool you.

Okay so I purposely avoided this book for months. I could'nt get past the cover. As a black woman I did not need to read 300 pgs about a BM drooling over some white woman. I see it all day in California. I finally broke down and was curious to see what yet another BM bashing BW had to say. And to my surprise the cover was just the bait!!! This book covered all the topics that has pained BW and BM for years! FINALLY FINALLY the truth in its rawest form, in your face. And yes, much of what I had already suspected about this topic validated the sense of "less then" many BW feel because of this.

BM have NO idea what the IMBLANCE of dating outside your race is having over our culture. BW would never disrespect or disregard BM the way they have done us. SHAME! If you don't value us (BM) what does that say to the rest of the world?? I know I know love should have no color but it does! I can't walk around a day in California, without this belief clawing my eyes out. No other race of men acts out in such COONING disrespectful behaviors but BM. As a BW I hate to admit, but I am embarressed and disgusted over the negative light this has had on BW over the years. We have been loyal threw it all and for what? Bets me, but one thing is certain I no longer accept the notion that BM have tried, in blaming BW for wherever the reason in driving them to date outside their race. I DON"T BUY IT! Many of you need I hate my nappy hair and dark skin because I watch too much white television detoxicing!!

I've dated black men all my life, some where good others were bad. That does not give me the right to disrespect BM and disown them! We BW keep it moving...This book once you get past the cover gives it to you straight up, no BS. Most of the positive comments are from black people on this site, while others are from those individuals who are benefiting from this illenss. BUY AND READ THIS BOOK!!! It is worth every penny.

Another new good read is "Don't Blame it on Rio". It covers this topic and other interesting insights of yet many other negative behaviors BM are drowning themselves in.

This was one of the worst books I have ever read. The author brings nothing new to the discussion of interracial relationships. There is no consistency to his logic and his "humor" is mean-spirited, bitter and most importantly, not funny. He has a very fine opinion of himself, which he never hesitates to share with the reader. This is a perfect example of a book being sold by its cover alone. The "author" is apparently getting people to buy the book based on it's provocative title alone. I guess he did one thing right when putting this trash together. Awesomely awful. One star is one star too many.

This book only served to continue my belief that many black men are just plain cowards and use any excuse other than the truth for thier choices.
The author is probably a one hit wonder and will probably never get another chance to whine at the expense of women.
I have taken this book and given it to the local libray, in hopes that perhaps someone else can dissect and figure it out.
I am saddened by the authors lack of courage, pride, and knowledsge of his african history along with his obvious lack of paternal love and support. However, I hope that when he chooses his next white victim that she will be able to see through the lies, self hate, denial and dislike for his race...and run

In my opinion as an educator is that the author loves black women and because they try to raise him up to a higher standard without becoming a crutch he resists, and rather than standing up to the challenge chooses to take an easy way out. Perhaps the writer assumes that a woman who is white is stupid, desperate or will become his bank account and thus his narrow reasoning.

I personally believe that the author is not a good writer and definately a whiner.

The gloomy tone that pervades this novel which seemed to turn a lot of people off was actually what I found interesting. The Inspector, recovering from an illness goes to visit an elderly priest who is a family friend at a home for people with degenerative diseases. When he arrives he's informed that the priest has died, but Dalgliesh begins to wonder if it was natural or murder. My only complaint with the story was partially to blame on my own attention span: Many of the suspects began to bleed together, and my inability to consume long passages at once left me looking back to keep the characters straight in my head. As a result I didn't find the book as absorbing as some of her others. Yet at the same time, the final forty pages was some of the most suspenseful of anything I've read thus far, and Dalgliesh's personal struggles throughout the book gave a human dimension to the character that up to now hadn't been seen.

This book begins in a gloomy mood and in a setting that seems hardly designed to hold a reader's attention: a nursing home. But the writing is so good that I stuck with it, and it all comes to a thrilling finale. Then I did something I rarely do: reread the book. This time I was completely bowled over by the quality of the writing. This is one of the most perfectly crafted books I have ever read. As such, I would rate it with such works as The Great Gatsby, Jude the Obscure, and Appointment in Samarra. What a surprise from a mystery novel.

First I should admit that I'm not a PD James fan. In fact this is the first of her books that I've read. It may be that the darkness of this book gives me the wrong impression as to how she writes. It does remind me of Agatha Christie's type of stories but it may also be because the singular character of Commander Adam Dalgleish is going through a dark time related to a recent illness.

The story itself is nothing special, though it may have been in 1975, but now it's kind of dated. It may also be because I find her style to be a little slow or ponderous and I'm used to the writings of Ian Rankin and James Lee Burke. No I don't think that there needs to be a shooting or car chase every other page, but it would be nice to read about something other than a description of the scenary.

To be fair about it I am planning on reading one of her later stories in the series, and to catch up on the character by watching some of the episodes on PBS. Just one man's opinion.

Adam Dalgleish is back in this well written, though ultimately depressing and bleak thriller. Recuperating from a near-death illness, Adam is summoned to a small village by an old friend, a priest named Father Michael. However, when he gets there, his old friend has died of a heart attack, and Adam finds himself involved with a hospice for the young disabled, i.e., terminally ill patients. James serves up a host of pathetic, sad creatures and as usual, a cast of mostly unlikeable characters. Dalgliesh serves more as an observer than a detective, since he is having his own crisis of whether to retire or not, but he nonetheless manages to investigate a series of deaths that may or may not be murder.
James continues her mastery of atmospheric tension and the culprit's identity is expertly hidden until the end.

Unlike some authors (Jonathan Kellerman, Maeve Binchy, Steve Martini) who write some terrific books and then go downhill, PD James's books get better and better with time. It's her early works I can't stand. It's not just me, either. Some of her early novels were entirely rewritten for television to get people to watch. I once contacted PBS to see if I had missed some of her books that seemed so good on Mystery! They actually told me this. This book was about in the middle of her long career, but it just never captured my interest. Look at her settings--hospitals, nursing homes, monastaries, hardly the locales for a hotbed of action to keep you on the edge of your seat. This book is set at a home for the disabled with progressive diseases out in the middle of nowhere. Dalgliesh is working alone, in fact recovering from mono and pneumonia and goes there to visit an elderly priest who turns up dead of a heart attack. There isn't much to suggest crimes have in fact been committed and Dalgliesh's sudden deduction of what is going on at the end is not even remotely believable. The only interesting thing anyone does in this book is drop dead occasionally. It's not a police procedural. When I compare it to something like Death in Holy Orders, there's no reason to read this book. It isn't awful (and some of James's other books are really awful) but she has much better ones in her repertoire.

A must read! Wil Haygood's book, In Black and White, The Life of Sammy Davis, Jr. not only captures the mesmerizing and oftentimes daunting physical movement of the man- Sammy- in the seemingly separate worlds of black and white but unapologetically captivates the reader with Sammy's human quest for love and approval.

The author skillfully provides the reader with a historical landscape to navigate the multidimensional aspects of the making of "Sammy" from his vaudeville childhood days to the inscription on the headstone of his final resting place--
Sammy Davis Jr. "The Entertainer" He Did It All...and indeed he did.

After reading the book, I can't wait to see Sammy "in living color" thanks to Denzel Washington's insight to purchase the screen rights.

Written by Deleso Alford Washington, J.D., LL.M.

Maybe the definitive biography of Sammy Davis Jr. can never be written. Or maybe it simply hasn't been done. This book is a mixed bag.

The book filters the story of Sammy Davis Jr. through race, everything is either black or white. As a result, you do get some interesting concepts, that Davis did not want to "be" black, as if all blacks (or for that matter, all whites) had something in common.

You do get extensive thoughts about his love for blonde women, and his affairs with Kim Novak is given a prominent amount of space.

You also have a wonderful portrait of Will Mastin, a man who is ignored in every other book about Davis.

But other things are glossed over, his drug and alcohol abuse, his Rat Pack days, even his marriage to May Britt.

Oh, do not expect anything about his music in here, absolutely nothing about any of his records.

This book does not reflect the spirit of the life of Sammy Davis, Jr. I'm afraid that it relects the spirit of the life that the author, Wil Haygood, unfortunately must have led.

I am very familiar with the details of Sam's life, I have heard it in his own words. Sam was a very pragmatic optimist who imagined the world in a very color-blind way. This is where Mr. Haygood leads the un-informed reader very far away from Sam's actual beliefs.

Sam didn't want to be white, he wanted to be the best. That is what he constantly strived for. Sam stood up to racism so many times, in so many ways. How many times was his nose broken in race baited fights from his hitch in the Army ? Sam experienced the ignorance of racism many, many times, from many different people. But for every racist he had to battle, he also saw many more people who he loved, trusted & repected, and who he knew felt the same way towards him.

Almost all of the material in this book is 'lifted' from the books co-written by Sam and Jane & Burt Boyar. These works are the true story. These people were there when these events happened, they witnessed them first hand. Not only has Mr. Haygood taken what actually transpired and twisted it to fit his agenda, he berates the people who daily lived through these experiences with Sam.

Wil Haywood, staff writer for the Washington Post, won the 2004 Hurston-Wright Legacy Award in Nonfiction, plus a host of other awards for In Black And White: The Life Of Sammy Davis Jr., so it's only fitting his impressive and entertaining biography of the life of Sammy Davis Jr. be reprinted in paperback to reach new generations of audiences with his award-winning life of one of America's most popular and versatile performers and entertainers of the 20th Century.

This is well written, thorough, entertaining, and really a superb history lesson. Great Job Mr. Haygood.

A black conservative Republican, who refuses to perform the Uncle Tom "Tap dance" that many of his fellow black conservative Republicans do: That is, Brown is not one of the many constantly genuflecting Black conservative Republicans "skinning-and-grinning" to get cheap "Brownie points" (pun intended) from the majority racist-leaning white mainstream audience. Nor does he play the race card in reverse invoking "pretend solidarity" with the "black gansta underclass," or with what he refers to as the corrupt "Black Talented Tenth," both of whom he fingers as doing as much harm to the country as greedy and intolerant white racists.

No, Brown, as one of his colleagues has referred to him, is an "Equal Opportunity [butt]-kicker." Unlike the cheaper versions of black conservatism (such as the Jessie Lee Petersons, Bill Cosbys, Armstrong Williams, and Lee Elders: the more notable of the genuflectors), goes about it methodically and constructively, goring all of the sacred cows equally. But much more importantly, what he says is sound social and political analysis -- back up by equally sound theory, and by a deep patriotic love and abiding faith for this country.
Brown, like the rest of us, has a genuine desire to see our country turn the corner and get beyond our race fixation and away from greed, moral and economic decay.

Using Whitney Young's metaphor "We didn't all come over on the same ship, but we're all in the same boat" as the centerpiece of this very sharp-edged socioeconomic critique and analysis, Brown proceeds to show us how, through compassion and Christian brotherhood, and by making everyone carry his own weight - meaning being equally culpable and equally responsible -- the greed and moral decay that is taking our nation down, can be fixed.

Some of the key points of his solution include:

(1) Instituting an Affirmative Action program that actually works for the poor, all the poor, and not just for middle class white women, as the present system does.

(2) Getting rid of the "Entitlement Socialism for the rich" by "means testing" all social programs, so that those who are financially able, do not siphon-off what is actually intended for the poor. Currently, ¾ of our federal entitlement dollar goes to people who have not demonstrated financial need. Simply getting the rich off the dole (of social security for instance) represents a much larger potential saving than even getting all of the poor off the dole. Brown's logic here is the same as that of the NFL draft: Only by strengthening the weakest link in the chain, can the nation as a whole get stronger.

(3) Restructuring the tax system to end deficit spending. Currently we borrow and spend too much, and save to little. And most of the spending is on nonproductive areas such as defense, interest on the debit, and entitlements, the great bulk of which goes to subsidies acquired through heavy lobbying by the big corporations and welfare to those who, if they were "means tested," probably would not qualify for it.

(4) Restoring our nation's productivity by electing leaders who will tell us the truth, and will make us understand that we cannot continue to consume more than we produce.

(5) Ending black dependence on white largesse, and demagogic Black leaders (as he calls them "BUM -- the Black Unaccountability Machine," plantation warriors, political gangsters): the elite black co-conspirators who preach continued reliance on governmental intervention rather than on educational achievement, moral virtues, and economic organization, for black advancement.

(6) Giving up on the goal of integration and the hope of ever assimilating into whiteness because it requires blacks to deny their own culture, further marginalizes them and making them dependent on white liberal solutions. The new black solution to inequality should be economic and cultural equality and self-sufficiency (presumably the same as what the Black Muslims have been preaching since their beginning).

(7) Weaning Blacks from the Democratic Party through Republican paid subsidies to Black entrepreneurs, what Brown calls the "35-65 solution."

While Brown's writing is lively, readable and three standard deviations from the norm, there is a great deal to recommend here, he does get bogged-down in the middle sections as he rails on about various conspiracies, from white-on-black genocide, to an AIDS conspiracy -- not that these are entirely irrelevant topics, but just should not have been included in this book. My only other criticism of the book is that while he spends an inordinate about of time railing against the socialist liberals (both white and black), when it came time to take his fellow white republicans to task for their racism and for their contributions to existing problems, Brown pulls his punches and becomes strangely mute. Despite this, since the book was published in 1995, one cannot overlook or dismiss the fact that almost every one of his predictions has come true. If nothing else he has a career in his future as an oracle and a soothsayer.

Five stars for a very lively, patriotic and interesting attempt to grapple with this nation's biggest problems, and for the most part, getting them right.

In his book, Tony Brown is only interested in presenting the truth to the reader. He exposes the problems with Black America in the past and in modern times. He believes that America should come together and fight the issue of racism head on. He is a strong Republican and offers many views on how blacks can overcome being marginalized in American society. He covers economic and political issues that I was very uninformed about. Probably one of the more interesting parts of the book were the chapters on AIDS. He presentd many theories that otherwise I would have never heard about. Even though I do not agreee with many of his views I have a huge amount of respect for Tony. He cares not only about certain blacks but for the advancement of the black masses and his solution is his text.

As you may know, I taught for 7 years in an inner-city middle school. The issue of race in America came up daily, and some days it was an ever-present feature. I was forced to think about it all of the time and all I know is that I don't know enough to solve the issues and no one ever will. Nevertheless, on ocassion I am moved to visit these issues again. This book seemed to be as good a place as any.

Tony Brown is a Black man (he prefers that term) who has hosted a PBS discussion show called "Tony Brown's Journal" for years. He also hosts a Saturday talk show on WLS 890 AM out of Chicago that can be heard throughout the midwest thanks to their high wattage broadcast strength.

He is an interesting man and a good discussion leader on his shows. His views were fairly consistent with my own, although I think that his preceptions of white america are a little off, just as he would undoubtedly think that my views of black America are off. The first 1/3 and the last 1/3 are full of pretty good thoughts, observations and ideas, except for their repitiveness.

The middle 1/3 is a bit bizarre. It concerns AIDS and his denial that it even exists. He claims that AIDS is not real because there are 30+ diseases that are associated with it. He wonders how certain types of cancers and certain types of fungal infections and viruses can all be from the same disease. He misunderstands that these diseases are presumed to be symptoms of AIDS since they are rare and usually are only present to people with depressed immune systems - which happens to people with AIDS (thus its name). He also touts a theory that claims that AIDS was started accidentally by using viruses from Monkeys to create a Smallpox vaccine that was used in Africa in the 1970s. After doing a google search I can tell you that he is not alone with this belief, but most others who share it assume that it was a racist plot by the US government in an effort to control population.

I was disappointed by "Black Lies, White Lies" because I like Brown's TV & radio shows. I give this book '2 stars' for its repitive nature and the bizarre middle of the book.

As an addendum, I thought I would add these conclusions that were gleaned from a poll and interviews by the "Washington Post" of black students and their beliefs concerning education that he quoted. I thought the poll pretty much encapsulated the attitudes of black students (as a whole) that I had in the Indianapolis Public Schools:

*Black students are poor and stay poor because they are dumber than Whites.
*Black kids who do their homework and behave must want to be white. White kids who do poorly or dress cool want to be Black.
*Black people don't want to work hard.
*Blacks don't need to work hard because it won't matter in the end.
*Blacks have to be bad so they can fight and defend themselves from other Blacks.
*Blacks see their badness as natural.
*Black men make women pregnant and leave.
*Black boys expect to die unnaturally.
*White people are smart and have money.

In my experience, the poll-takers nailed these attitudes dead on. I fought against these feelings for years, but to be honest, I got wore out and left the Indianapolis Public Schools partially because I couldn't turn it around

Black Leaders and White Liberals

Throughout history, black leaders in the United States have worked hard
trying to bridge the economic gap between black and white communities in
this country. They have made it one of their main goals to express their
anger to the United States government to seriously address this problem and
make an honest effort to reduce the growing unemployment rate among Black
Americans. Even though some progress has been made, with special programs
targeting minorities, we are still tailing far behind the white majority.
I will talk briefly about these so called programs later on in this report.
Getting back to the issue at hand, I think it is absurd for a black man in
this country to talk out against our great black leaders who have worked so
hard to achieve the little advantages that we have gained. In a book that I
recently read "Black Lies, White Lies - According to Tony Brown," Mr. Brown
expressed his opinion about the Black leaders and White liberals that are
doing something close to nothing for the minorities in this country. In
this essay I will argue that Mr. Brown's argument for this conclusion is
weak.

Tony Brown's basic argument can be summarized as follows:

Black leaders first failed Black Americans when they embraced integration
rather than economic equality as the solution to the problem of inequality.
The last great leader was "Martin Luther King, Jr."
America's Black leadership sees its primary function as blaming whites for
the dire problems of the black community and demanding more government
intervention as the sole solution to this predicament.
Black economic development and social equality have, in part, been subverted
by the very black leaders who pointed their fingers at whites.
Our failed black leaders and their misguided white liberal "allies" are
responsible for the sad fact that blacks are the only ethnic or racial group
in this country that has never become a serious player in the economy.
The failure of Blacks to harness economic power has resulted in the great
social and economic divide that still separates their community from the
rest of the nation.
Mr. Brown calls many of the white liberal allies of the Black community
"racists" because they have demonstrated their belief in the inferiority of
Blacks by enacting policies that place Blacks at the mercy of welfare and
other socialistic entitlement programs for the middle class as well as the
poor.

Many of the problems that Blacks face today-material poverty, dysfunctional
families, illiteracy, and so on-can be traced back directly to the
organization of the Black protest movement by whites, many of whom were
socialists.
White leaders instilled socialism and its "where's mine?" mind-set in
Blacks, rather than capitalism and its "I'll get my own" attitude.

Mr. Brown's book point out some interesting issues, but nonetheless, there
are a great number of flaws with this book.

For instance, Mr. Brown's argument in statement one fails to explain the
real reason why black leaders fought for integration. In this part of his
argument, Mr. Brown seems to be arguing for two things: first, that
integration is a novel form of liberal racism, and second, Black leaders
embraced integration rather than economic equality because they believed
that they needed to be integrated with whites to survive. Both of these
claims misrepresent what Black leaders had been arguing.
The basic underlying assumption of the Black integrationist (Black leaders)
position is that American institutions can be designed so that blacks can
enjoy, along with whites, economic, political, and social security as well
as self-respect. Black leaders and white liberals also believe that
segregation is immoral because it stresses the human differences rather than
their similarities. Nowhere in Mr. Brown's book did he consider that
segregation could possibly cultivate more racism in this country. Instead,
he believes that we can be separate at home and at school and then come
together as a country when needed.
Mr. Brown also contradicted himself in statement two: he says that Martin
Luther King, Jr. was the last great leader. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a
Black leader and integrationist. Some of Mr. Brown's arguments are shaky on
other grounds as well. Let's examine some of these arguments: In statement
three, he says that Blacks are demanding more government intervention and
believe this is the sole solution for their predicament. In statement four,
he tells us that the Black economic development and social equality has been
subverted by black leaders. In statement five, six, seven, eight and nine-
he wants us to believe that the Black leaders and white liberals have
misguided the Blacks in this country to be dependent on the government.
These arguments are weak because, again, Mr. Brown is making statements that
don't represent the full truth. Black leaders have never suggested that
government programs will solely solve the Black problems in this country,
like Mr. Brown wants his readers to believe. But they do express that Blacks
are victims of persistent racism in this country, and that is why fingers
are being pointed at the whites. Blacks need government's intervention to
help bridge the economic and social gap between Black and white Americans.
Black leaders and some white liberal goals are not guided to make Blacks
dependent on government programs but are guided to make the programs work
for Blacks. Given the history of this country, it is a virtual certainty
that without programs like affirmative action, racial discrimination would
cover our society like a bad storm.
Furthermore, Mr. Brown's argument against affirmative action is also flawed.
According to Mr. Brown, affirmative action has not made a major impact on
poverty and it is a failed racial remedy. It has provided greater advantages
toward the middle-class Blacks, and white females.
The essential reason for affirmative action is this:
To prohibit discrimination and improve the employment opportunities for
minorities and women.
To prohibit discrimination in educational institutions.
And to prohibit discrimination in housing.
Affirmative action was not implemented to solve poverty in this country, but
to eliminate further discrimination toward special groups.
Nowhere in Mr. Brown's book did he explain affirmative action to his
readers; instead, he gave his readers a negative view of affirmative action
and used that explanation to support why the program was a failure.
In summary, Mr. Brown offers a very weak argument for his conclusion.
Several of his arguments against Black leaders and white liberals were
misleading. He gave his readers false information and contradicted himself
throughout his book. The affirmative action argument is also faulty because
it poses weak explanations about the program. It should be noted that many
books have been written about the racial issues in this country and some
very convincing, but Mr. Brown's argument against Black leaders and
preferential treatment was weak and not persuasive.

If americans keep on pestering me, telling me im a foreigner, ill probably blow a gasket and beat them up; something most white americans wont expect from an asian (hence, we're called the 'Model Minority').

I loved the subject material and the points Wu makes, but boy was that hard reading. Usually a proficient reader, it took FOREVER to get through this writing. Good points, unique and interesting points, but style of writing (combined with tiny font) made for repeated re-reads to ensure I understood the point and could remember it.

This was much harder even than my text book for a Race Relations class I am taking!

If there is such a thing as Cliff Notes for this book, it would be well worth the investment!

-k.

I can honestly say this: I will never, ever be able to listen to a racist comment about Asian Americans again - even an unintended one -without thinking of what I've learned in this book. There were times I cried while reading, considering the life-long "otherness" foisted on Asian Americans by white Americans, including myself.

A few chapters into this book, I was sitting in an exit row on a plane that was getting ready for take-off. The flight attendant came down the aisle to ask the perfunctory questions of us in those seats, of our willingness to die for the cause and all. The flight attendants are required to get a verbal `yes' from each passenger in the exit row. Sitting across the aisle from me was a middle aged Asian American business man, dressed impeccably, clearly a frequent flier (as most people in the exit row are). After explaining the situation, the flight attendant turned to this man and asked, "do you speak English?" he responded, "yes", with the complete lack of accent only available to a 2nd or 3rd (or longer) generation Asian American. I almost jumped out of my seat, with my new awareness of what it would be like to be asked questions like this (and worse), have assumptions made, and be treated as "other", and "not us", for your entire life. (I actually turned to the man, and a bit shaky with my brand-new righteous indignation on behalf of all Asian Americans, said, "I apologize for the stupidity of Caucasians." He gave me the odd look I deserved.)

Here's the rub: how do I - how do we - engage in this critical conversations without somewhat perpetuating or adding to the "otherness" sin against Asian Americans? By the very fact that I am trying to figure out how to be a part of change - in my own heart, first, and in our culture in some way - I am concurrently, and by necessity, bringing attention to the uniqueness (read: otherness) of the Asian American experience. How can I pursue the friendship I think I would really enjoy with the Asian American youth worker in san diego I met through all this mess, have conversations about stuff like this, and yet still not treat him as my token Asian American friend, as my personal guilt-assuager, or as my "project" - all positions that do violence to him.

The book actually addresses this tension, explaining (at length) why the ideal of "colorblindness" doesn't work. but, either I didn't quite understand that part, or I thought the final conclusion of "live in the tension" wasn't quite satisfying enough.

Anyhow. I really do recommend this book, especially for anyone who would like to grow in their understanding of the Asian American experience and the issues that continue to surround the racism we don't tend to talk about in America.

My only concern with this book was that it felta little dragged out, like perhaps a better editor would have made it more concise. Nonetheless, I managed to make my way through the entire thing and it was well worth it. While I don't have the energy to write a very intense and long review, I must say that his chapters on the model minority myth (coming from a victim of the stereotype and one who believed it to be true) and on the dangers of rational discrimination are both extremely enlightening. I would highly recommend this book to anyone looking for a book that doesn't leave non-blacks or non-whites a little left out of racial discourse in America.

Throughout the 1990's, both conservatives and liberals worried about the large divide between blacks and whites over issues like the Crown Heights riots, The Los Angeles riots, the O.J. Simpson verdict, Louis Farrakhan's "Million Man March", affirmative action, hate crime legislation, choice of political parties and many other topics. The recent emergence of issues such as racial profiling and "reparations" for slavery indicates that this divide is as wide as ever. For at least the last 40 years, political, social and cultural elites have taken a particular point of view regarding this gap and how best to overcome it. From the Kerner Commission of the 1960's to President Clinton's "Dialogue on Race" in the 1990's, the proposed remedy has been to make whites realize the daily racism blacks (and to a lesser extent all non-whites) face, as well as the daily privileges they get from being white. In other words, blacks have the clear view on American racism and whites must be disabused of their bigoted, wrong-headed opinions and made aware of their true history of oppression. In order to do this, a mountain of racial myths has been created. Perhaps some of these myths are put forth by those who only want racial advantage for their own group. But most of these untruths exist because people have never heard the whole story on a host of racial issues in American and world history.

Indeed, during a tour to promote his book on American race relations, Yellow: Race in America Beyond Black and White (2002), Frank Wu, the first Asian-American law professor at Howard University, appeared on a local black talk show in Washington DC hosted by NPR personality Kojo Nnamdi. Professor Wu also writes for the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, the Chicago Tribune, and The Nation, so he is no minor character. The two commentators immediately started talking about the history of white American racism and spent considerable time informing viewers about the "fact" that during WWII the American government interned Japanese-Americans but not Italian-Americans or German-Americans. Indeed, if America really did intern non-whites whose ancestors happened to come from Japan, but not whites whose ancestors came from Italy or Germany, what can be more telling about the reality of American racism?



The fact is that about half of those interned by the U.S. government during WWII were white (Mostly Italian-Americans and German-Americans). In Undue Process: The Untold Story of America's German Alien Internees (1997), Arnold Krammer, professor of history at Texas A&M University, describes the extensive wartime policy of interning Europeans - a policy that has disappeared from history books and that gives the lie to the orthodox view that Japanese relocation was a race-based policy. Using government documents, newspaper accounts, and interviews with former internees, Prof. Krammer has documented the officially forgotten history of the internment of whites. The United States started to intern German and Italian merchant seamen in U.S. ports in April 1941 while the country was officially neutral - a clear violation of law. By October 1941, it had formal plans for interning Germans and Italians living in the United States, and began implementing them on December 8, 1941 - three days before the U.S. was officially at war with Germany and Italy. Some Germans who were naturalized citizens were stripped of U.S. citizenship so they could be interned legally. The total number of enemy aliens interned by the Roosevelt Administration was 31,275. This included 10,905 Germans, 16,849 Japanese, and 3,278 Italians. The rest consisted of other Europeans from enemy nations, with whites constituting 46 percent of the total.



Another forgotten point about Japanese internment was the open disloyalty of many Japanese-Americans during the war. Over three-fourths of Japanese-Americans held dual Japanese citizenship, which indicated a less-than-total attachment to America. Once the war began, unlike German and Italian-Americans, many Japanese-Americans were openly hostile. For example, approximately 14,000 filed to renounce U.S. citizenship. The demand for renunciation was so great that in 1944 Congress amended the Nationality Act of 1940 to allow U.S. citizens to renounce citizenship during wartime. Of these 14,000 petitioners, 5,620 followed the process through to full renunciation, and gave up citizenship. They were then interned as enemy aliens, a consequence that probably kept many other disloyal Japanese- Americans from renouncing citizenship. Without this group of 5,620 Japanese - officially known as "renunciants" and, in effect, self-selected internees - the number of European internees would have been greater than the number of Japanese. There are no known cases of a U.S. citizen of European origin renouncing citizenship during the war. When forced to choose between their homeland and the United Sates, many Japanese chose to side with their race. Ironically, it is on the grounds of "racism" that Japanese have successfully sued the U.S. government. Activists succeeded in winning financial compensation from Congress on seven separate occasions - in 1948, 1951, 1952, 1956, 1960, 1972, and 1978. In 1988, Congress issued an official apology, and awarded $20,000 to each former internee and relocated person of Japanese descent. Four years later, Congress extended eligibility for the $20,000 to non-Japanese spouses of Japanese internees who voluntarily joined their families in internment. In June 1998, the Clinton Administration announced it would pay financial compensation to Japanese-Latin Americans interned in the United States during the war. There is now a memorial to Japanese internees in Washington D.C.

Needless to say, no white internees have received money, an apology or a monument and their sufferings have been erased from history.

This is not a typical romance book, most AA romance writers seem to stick their characters in the safe upper middle class world of professional white collar jobs and high education. This story is set in the world of urban ghetto America. A complex Cinderella story of poor making her way of the ghetto girl meets educated well off boy. They fall in love at first sight and the drama begins. I found the beginning the weaker part of the book but once the secondary characters got involved the story took off. I recommend this book for people who want something with a more grit than sugar in their romantic fiction.

I have been trying to find interracial romance books with bwwm - thank you. This book actually had substance that flowed with the romance of the story. The intimate scenes were not overpowering and, well, it has a flow to it that was unexpected. I can only recall there being one instance where I felt like I had missed something, but by that time, things were getting good and I did not want to ruin it by rereading.

I have read other works by Ms. King and have enjoyed them. However, with this book, I just felt overwhelmed by "too much" going on in the story. I also found it hard to believe some parts of the book. I don't doubt that Richard and Ebony could meet and develop the feelings that they had - stranger things have happened. What I can doubt and have trouble believing that even though Richard loved Ebony that he would tolerate some of the things that Trae did. It seems to detract from Richard's manhood - any red blooded male's manhood be he black or white. And then there is Ebony - loyalty to the hood - yes, loyalty to family - yes even loyalty to Trae to some point. But where is her loyalty to herself that now that she has found love - to grasp it with everything she has? It was an okay read, but not high on my list of Ms. King's books.

Did anyone else think that Ebony didn't deserve Richard? She annoyed me to no end. Could one person be that dumb. I understand the environmental circumstances can sometimes cloud judgment, but there was no excuse for Ebony's stupidity. I actually wanted her to die and that's not supposed to be the case. Her stupidity seemed to leak and infect Richard as well, which was a huge disappointment. Since I'm a collector of interracial romance novels, this book will stay in my collection, but it might not get a second read.

When I first read the excerpt of this story I couldn't wait to get this book. I got it and I read it and I thought, what just happened here? I didn't understand what I read...gang violence, betrayal by parents on both sides, denial of one's true ethnicity...a lot going on, I wanted to like it but it didn't work for me. But it did for alot of others. Read it for yourself.

This book points out, that even in the 21st Century; the separation of black and white, with hostility and un-equality still exists.
The United States is still seen as two separate nations, with the two races living different worlds. The dimensions of race and how it still controls the lives and divisions of our society is still present.
His book has 12 chapters, but I am focusing on chapter 7 which is the "equity in employment, qualifications and quotas". It is unfortunate to say, that this is still a sensitive race-related issue, without a proper balance; even so affirmative action is involved. The statistics which are used in his book are indeed fact. Hacker tried to be fair, however struggled to accomplish this goal of equal employment.
Hacker argues that as recent as the year 2000, areas of employment were still closed to African Americans; he used the census to document the representation, which was only 11.3%. On another note was the income gap among the African American population vs. the white families which earned more. He argues that the African American woman finds jobs easier then her male counterpart, however these jobs are considered "black jobs"; this would include services such as housekeeping.
Affirmative Action brought about some change for the workforce, but mainly for the females, white or black, which left out the African American male. Hacker points out that the possibility of why the African American male struggles with obtaining an average position could be because the white man is threatened by the African American male, or feels uncomfortable in a business that has an abundance of African American males working and therefore only employs a minimal number. It is pointed out in his book that the people in power use the race as a means of domination and discrimination. He also points out that it is America which made being a member of the black race so difficult. It is noted that the inequality of pay difference gives the African American population a lesser start in life.
If race plays the role in how people fare financially, why is it then that the with American tells the African Americans that there is plenty of work, when what black Americans want is no more and no less than what with Americans wants; a chance for steady employment at a decent pay.....to be black in America is to k now that you remain last in line for so basic requisites as the means of supporting yourself and your family. The discrimination exists, as well as the un-equality which is faced in every level of society. Overall, the problem to the African American is not how to deal with this knowledge, but how to make the society as a whole aware of these inequalities.
The book states also that the white American s believe is, that there are no issue at hand in respects to this continuous problem.
Hacker does not offer any solutions to this problem our society faces. He points out the truth, that African Americans and whites live in different worlds. The discrimination the African American race is facing, shows that common sense can tell us that racism is far from ending; therefore we all must begin to work towards a solution.

Having read this book in 1992 and recently purchased it for my collection, this a great read with various chapters based on history, politcal,and social mores of African- Americans (in the black corner)and our archenemies White Americans (in the white corner). got to hype up the race war angle some of you white conservatives who are doing it in your reviews about this book. If you have a politcal agenda you will either like or hate Hacker's book based on your politcal afilliation, If you are a Liberal, you may like the senstive and fair airing he gives towards the history of why we became two nations.If you are a conservative or Neo- Nazi type like the white racist from georgia that African- Americans have no morals,or you will hate that he's giving Black folks a pass on their moral problems.

Well as a Black Nationalist who believes that intergration is bad social policy but a majority Black commonwealth on American soil may be benefical, I think that historical factors presented in Hacker's book would prevent both sides from ever seeing each other in any rational sense as Americans because

1. Whites see each other as intellectually, morally superior to African - Americans (even the lowest white trash person) and will never consider them equal in the eyes of U.S. law or in their hearts

2. African - Americans (especailly males) will never forgive or forget what the majority White population did to their families, culture, livelihoods and community structures especailly after Slavery.

Hacker has crafted an excellent book through great research and in many ways he is on point throughout the book, when he states the the majority white population will make Hispanics and Asians "honoray whites" demonizing Black Males for politcal and social advantage against charges of racism by blacks. And many of your reviewers are right about some blacks hating whites, I think 387 years of continual defacto racism would create some blacks who would hurt their fellow blacks (in a self- destructive way) whites and other citizens (some blacks hate whites like the Arabs hate Jews).I consider that like the scene in the movie "Independence Day", when "President" Bill Pullman asked the Alien,

Pullman - can there be peace between our worlds

Alien - NOOOOOOOOO NO PEACE !!!!

Pullman - What do you want from us?

Alien I want you to DIE !!!!!

Let the hate mail begin !!!! at least I was "candid" in our so- called dicussion on race.

the plethora of percentages and numbers weigh it down. The views of the author were one sided and sometimes a little biased agaisnt the majority. This is a small quibble and does not really take away from the main message the author is trying to convey. This book is, however, quite an eye opener especially for those who believe that in this country all men are created equal. This book proves that it simply isn't so.

First, I would say that this book is refreshingly dispassionate and un-overheated, both qualities that have been sorely lacking in recent discussions of race. Also, there is plenty of truth in it--some explicitly stated, some not quite so obvious. But truth is a two-edged sword, and Mr. Hacker doesn't come clean about all of it. I think he truly believed he was presenting an objective discussion, and he actually came pretty close, but for a few caveats.

The book does a good job of showing the daily trials black people face, and includes a clever exercise that can jolt you into awareness of just how much you do value your white skin. It also talks straight about how much racism runs deep underground or happens behind the façade of political correctness, and about both sides of the slavery issue. But it runs into trouble in a few ways. First, the author theorizes that other minorities such as Asians and Jews, become "honorary whites" by virtue of their achievements. He thinks the dichotomy is white/nonwhite, but I think it's just the opposite: black/nonblack. Nobody thinks Asians or Arabs are white, but because they're not black, they get more openings and more respect than black people do.

Then there is the statistical data. In every chapter, Hacker gives plenty of it, but then explains or excuses away what the numbers say. And some of his arguments are pretty specious. He says that blacks do less well in school because the oppressive presence of whites makes them feel so hopeless they just give up before they start. Well, that's on a par with my saying that I never did well in math because the fact that there were Asian kids in my class made me feel so insecure I didn't even try. If I'd tried that excuse at home, my parents would've laughed in my face and then told me to quit blaming everybody else, get off my hind end, and either hit the books or go to my teacher for extra help. Hacker never connects the dots, but the data say that blacks have sex earlier and less responsibly; do poorly in school and are more likely to drop out; and commit a disproportionate amount of crime, usually on each other.

Hacker offers the usual explanation for all this: It's white people's fault. I'm willing to grant that it's probably not a lot of fun to be black, and that blacks have suffered some unbelievable injustices that still sting and probably leave a psychological residue. But Hacker leaves unsaid the problem that blacks keep digging their own graves in a lot of ways. He seems to think white guilt is some kind of solution to the problem; but if he were to publish a second edition (the book was published in 1992), he would have to address the growing feeling among whites that they're just not buying it anymore. Nobody's saying pretend all those terrible things never happened--but nobody's holding a gun to your head telling you to start having babies in your teens, drop out of school, start dealing drugs, and commit crimes on your fellow citizens either. At some point you have to take some personal responsibility.

So if anybody wants to foam at the mouth and call me a neo-Nazi, go ahead...I'm just saying what most people would say if they were honest with themselves and each other.

I am very disappointed because I have not yet received my book and I don't know who I am suppose to get in touch with to get my book, I need some help.

I shouldn't be dumbfounded by some of the prudish, narrow-minded responses this book has evoked. And yet I am.
As a deeply religious and spiritual person, as a feminist, and also a photographer of classical nudes not unlike those presented in this book, I commend Nimoy's work.
1. From an artistic perspective the technique, composition, and visual impact is intense and yet quiet.
2. From a feminist perspective, this work does NOT objectify women, but rather celebrates them. Mr. Nimoy has never been one to objectify women's bodies, as he made so clear with his Full Body Project in which he sympathetically photographed very, very rotund women. His very reference to Shekhina, the female aspect of the Hebrew God Yahweh (if you don't know anything about her, please look her up) shows his deep respect for women. Yes, these women are naked, but they are clothed in their own strength. They are not presented as objects of lust, but rather as beings connected to the spiritual realm. The nudity just serves to add to the poignancy, intimacy, and sincerity of the work.
3. Spiritually, there is nothing remoting insulting about this work. Nudity is not a filthy thing, just as sex is not (although this work is clearly not even remotely about sex.) Yahweh put Adam and Eve into the garden stark naked, because this was His idea of perfection, innocence, and beauty. It wasn't until sin came into play that clothes entered the scene -- Adam and Eve came up with the idea of clothing, and Yahweh just went along with it. Clothing is a social construct created by humans in reaction to their own shame. Worshipping before God nude shows our vulnerability, shows that we hold no barriers between ourselves and the Divine, and that we come to Him as He created us.
Simultaneously, this work challenges conservative Jewish, Christian, and Muslim perspectives of women that suggest they are the originators of sin and evil, and therefore do not have the same right or ability to connect with God as men (and as such are not allowed to be religious leaders.) He particularly highlights women's ability to create and harbor life within themselves, using this as an example of their unique form of spirituality. Mr. Nimoy's women approach God without the shame in relation to their womanhood and their supposed original sin, concepts the religious right tries to pound into them. Their femininity and pride therein is emphasized by their nakedness.
On all counts, a provocative, artistic, rich, reverent, inspiring work.

Actually I don't like pictures of naked women, because there are already too many of them, everywhere. But these pictures are different. They are very aestethically and well made. To share the topics Judaism godhood and women is really intersting, because I have never seen anyone - especially no man - who puts together believe and women, anyway if the women are naked or not. I think it is very couragenously of Leonard Nimoy to do it. I always knew he is a very emancipated man, he always was.

I liked most the pictures where I could see the relations to Judaism directly. The pictures are really impressive. I am not a Jew, but very interested in that religion and Leonard Nimoy (himself a trusted Jew) shows me one more time that Jews have something special and they (many of them I think) know what life can be when one uses its qualities. Actually anyone should know, it shouldn't something to do with believe or religion...

Very well done book and an interesting facet of a man who many only know as green blooded and with pointed ears, what is much too little, if one wants to describe Leonard Nimoy.

Fans of avant-garde photography and soft porn will no doubt love this book, but I found it offensive. No religious Jew, man or woman, would pray in a tallis and tefillin while so scantily clad.
These may be the fantasies of an old man going through his second puberty, but they are not the kinds of images that I would want in my kosher home. There are ways to portray the beauty of Jewish women without the goyishkeit of stripping their clothes off.

The book is doubly disappointing because some of Nimoy's past projects have included narrating NPR concerts of High Holy Days music and PBS's excellent video on Hasidic Judaism ("A Life Apart: Hasidim in America"), portraying a Holocaust survivor as well as Tevye, plus many other performances that gave him a patina of authenticity where Judaism is concerned. Even in Star Trek, he brought his Jewishness along in creating the "Vulcan salute" and much of Vulcan culture in general. Because of this background, his fans will now be misled into thinking that this book portrays something authentically Jewish. It does not!

I am deeply disappointed that Mr. Nimoy fell for the neo-pagan myth of the Shekhinah as a personified "goddess." Ever since Raphael Patai published that awful book called "The Hebrew Goddess" back in the 70s, which claimed that the Caananite idols were once part of Judaism, this canard has continues to circulate in the gentile world. In real Judaism, the Shekhinah is not a goddess, it is the indwelling presence of God. It's the "spirit of holiness within" all things in God's creation -- more analagous to the "Holy Spirit" than to a goddess. It is a feminine ASPECT of God, yes. But to personify it with photos of women is a form of idolatry that has no place in Judaism.

The popular misconception of Shekhinah as a woman comes from the fact that the word is GRAMMATICALLY feminine in Hebrew. So are the words for "soul," "Torah," "prayer" and a lot of other things, because EVERY noun in Hebrew is either masculine or feminine, the same as Spanish or French. There is no neuter pronoun in Hebrew. But, when Hebrew is translated into English, the he/she pronouns become "it" instead. Granted, this does eliminate much of the male-female imagery in the Torah. But Nimoy's book is not the way to reclaim the feminine symbolism. Had he called it something else and left out the Jewish references, it might have passed as an artistic study of the female form (he is a good photographer.) As it is, the book is a neo-pagan travesty. What a sad exit for the great actor and writer who gave us the complex (and very modest) character of Mr. Spock.

Contrary to some of the amusingly horrified reviews here, every single page of Shekhina is not plastered with breasts or splayed genitals. Of course there is nudity- full nudity on a couple of pages- but it is very tastefully done (if you're looking for pictures of naked women in an erotic context, look elsewhere). Nimoy's photography depicts these women reverently and they very much bring across the spirituality he intended.

Leonard Nimoy shows that he is as fine a photographer as he is an actor and film director in "Shekhina", his first monograph of photographs. These are beautiful, sensual photographs of Jewish women and are in themselves, an intriguing photographic exploration into Jewish femininity. And yet Nimoy's work doesn't quite rise up to Edward Weston's or Robert Mapplethorpe's in its ability to inspire or to infuriate the viewer. To his credit, Nimoy demonstrates his technical acumen in lighting and composition. However, I wish his work was visually more interesting.

This book gives you a lot of insight into the relationship of Mary and Abe. The writing is very poetic. Enjoyed a lot.

This book was wonderful! I read it straight through on a recent trip. Hated to put it down. Very, very interesting to see another side of some great historic happenings. I felt as if I were a there, watching and developed a better understanding of several historic events. I think everyone should read it. As a background for American histroy. I am buying another copy for my daughter, as I do not want to part with mine.

Although this volume comes from the memories of someone familiar with the Lincoln White House and who became a close friend of Mary Todd Lincoln, it must be read cautiously. For example, despite the book's basic authenticity I find its account of Stephen Douglas's love for young Mary Todd and her jilting of Lincoln implausible despite Keckley's claim that she got the story directly from Mary Todd Lincoln and Anson Henry (a close friend of Abraham and Mary, who was a matchmaker encouraging their romance). Possibly some errors might be attributed to one or more literary assistants who helped compile the book. If a reader needs to be certain a about a particular statement, comparison with other sources is wise. Still, the volume will be valuable to anyone interested in firsthand impressions of the Lincoln White House.

I got this little book so that I could learn more about the Lincolns and their home life at the White House. It does an excellent job of telling the story of Elizabeth and Mary's friendship, which I wish could have continued, but alas, it didn't. I would recommend this book to all readers interested in US history, not matter what their age or gender, so that they can get an intimate view of the Lincoln's family life. Elizabeth was a strong and proud woman with a high moral and ethical character...if she were alive today, she would be swamped with interview requests and book deals!

In 1868, three years after the War Between the States ended and Abraham Lincoln was murdered, Elizabeth Keckley sat down to write a partial history of her life as a slave and modiste (dressmaker) for Mary Todd Lincoln at the White House. If readers judge "Behind the Scenes" by the standards of modern biographies, they won't do the book justice.

"Lizzie" Keckley was a slave who insisted on buying her freedom, even after being offered it for nothing. In modern terms, she was an "Aunt Tom" for validating the notion that any human being can be bought and sold for a price. By her own standards, she was affirming her value to society. It's impossible to judge such a person in contemporary terms.

Lizzie's dressmaking skill attracted the attention of Mary Todd Lincoln in 1861. Mrs. Lincoln was quite addicted to clothes, and hired "Dear Lizzie" as her private modiste. Their association solidified into a deep friendship after the death in 1862 of Willie Lincoln (in the White House); Lizzie offered warmth and solicitude, badly needed by an erratic First Lady whose intemperate ways and harsh tongue had made her perhaps the most disliked person in Washington. The friendship persisted after Lincoln's assassination, when Lizzie aided Mrs. Lincoln in purging her monstrous debts (she owed $70,000 to department stores) by trying to sell off old dresses and jewelry.

"Behind the Scenes" ended the friendship. After its publication Mary Lincoln, her pride wounded, dropped "Dear Lizzie" and referred to Mrs. Keckley as "that colored historian."

For students of the assassination Mrs. Keckley's reminiscences are especially helpful. Several weeks after April 14, 1865, while Mrs. Lincoln was still in mourning inside the White House, Lizzie told her "the new messenger" (not identified by name in the book, unfortunately) was on watch, he being the same man who had abandoned his post outside Lincoln's box at Ford's Theater. Mrs. Lincoln excoriated the "new messenger" and accused him of complicity in the assassination. The messenger admitted his carelessness but denied complicity, insisting he had simply taken a seat where he could better watch the play.

Except for the ambiguous word "messenger," this account conforms precisely to the convential wisdom that prevailed until about 25 years ago, i.e. that John F. Parker, a Metropolitan Police officer assigned to White House duty, was responsible for guarding Lincoln's box on the night of the assassination, but left his post and allowed John Wilkes Booth clear entry (and how would Booth have known the coast would be clear?). Post-modern historians, possibly seizing on Keckley's use of "messenger" to describe Parker, contrived a theory that Parker's duties never included protecting Lincoln...which idea begs the obvious question, "Why would Mrs. Lincoln have been so angry at someone who wasn't responsible in the first place?" And, since Parker supposedly went on trial for negligence (the records were mysteriously destroyed), "Why would anyone have been put on trial for neglecting Lincoln at Ford's Theater if he had been only a White House functionary all along?"

"Pulling into the lot behind the Transition Headquarters, I was startled to see several black SUVs parked with their motors running and earnest looking men peering out the open windows - my introduction to the United States Secret Service. My first glimpse of the Secret Service agents drove home the point that I was about to embark on a journey that, if successful, would put me in close proximity to some of the most powerful and important people in the world. Great, I thought, no pressure at all."

Thus began Ron Christie's interview process for a position as a Deputy Assistant for domestic policy to Vice President-Elect Cheney. Throughout his page-turning book, Black in the White House, he weaves stories together from his three and one half year tenure in the White House that make it read more like a novel than a narrative. He provides a unique view of the Vice President, President and their respective staffs that is seldom, if ever, reported by the media. This book paints a portrait that reveals the true personalities of the leaders of the United States and the tremendous responsibilities they have.

Although sometimes sophomoric, maudlin and perhaps even pandering, Christie tells his stories as if he were a child marveling in awe at the world's leaders for whom he was asked to work instead of as a trained attorney who had important work to do. As a Deputy Policy Advisor to Senator George Allen (son of Redskin's coach Allen) for eight years, he was asked by the Republican Committee in December of 2000 to be an observer of the Presidential recount vote in Jacksonville, Florida. Shortly after flying to Florida, the Supreme Court ruled in George Bush's favor, George Bush became Presidential-Elect Bush and Ron Christie was asked to interview as a Deputy Assistant for domestic policy for Vice President-Elect Cheney.

During the waiting process after his interview, Christie candidly reveals his feelings of nervousness and uncertainty regarding his appointment. Waiting for the phone to ring, not sleeping at night, unable to think lucidly, he is no more than an average person waiting to hear the decision about their interview. Throughout the book he demonstrates his role as a normal person who is honored to serve the Vice President, President and his country by easily blending his responsibilities with his humbleness. He also makes it clear that the principals of President Bush's transition team (who would later become the cabinet and advisors after the inauguration) are extremely intelligent individuals who espouse a tremendous work ethnic in serving the Vice-President and President. Concurrently he also divulges their human and compassionate sides that few are privileged to see.

Christie worked intimately with Vice President Cheney's staff including Chief of Staff Scooter Libby, Dan McGrath, Mary Matalin and even Vice President Cheney himself. He tells tales of their dedication, character and wit. In one instance Christie was asked to attend a meeting with Vice President Cheney and noted historian Stephen Ambrose, who

was attempting to restore the Missouri River to resemble its appearance in time to celebrate the bicentennial of Lewis and Clark's expedition. Ambrose indicated that his plan to dam the river was supported in Missouri and in several states downstream. Christie knew that Ambrose's assertion was erroneous and the Vice President, always with razor sharp perception, realized that Christie was uncomfortable and asked him if he had any questions. Christie questioned Ambrose why the Missouri House of Representatives voted 138-0 to denounce the plans and why Governor Bob Holden joined several other governors to write a letter to President Bush voicing their opposition. Not accustomed to being questioned, Ambrose probably expected VP Cheney to chastise Christie. Instead, Cheney asked Christie to draft a letter to Ambrose in which the VP would "express his inability to advocate Ambrose' plan to President Bush".

September 11, 2001 was a day that most Americans will never forget. For Christie and the White House staff it was a day of horror. Not only was the horror expressed for the victims in the World Trade Center and the Pentagon but it also extended to the White House staff that was literally in the direct line of fire. After it was clear that the crashes were an attack and not an accident, the White House staff was immediately escorted out of the building by the Secret Service and told to leave. Unfortunately most of them could not return to their homes since Washington was in pandemonium and all roads were completely blocked; many stayed at friends within the city. Two days later when it was safe to enter the White House the horror was repeated when they again had to be evacuated, this time due to a bomb scare. In essence, the security and comfort that was indicative of the White House had been indelibly shattered. Although terrified to return to the White House, the staff was reminded by Andy Card that they represented the President and now was the time to fight back by going about their business and not being intimidated by fear. Indeed, the urgency at hand changed the course of President Bush's presidency. Christie relates how difficult it was for all the members of the White House to continue to run the country.

In early 2002 Christie was asked to be the Special Assistant to the President to help run the USA Freedom Corps. Although honored to work directly for the President, Christie was torn by the thought of accepting the offer due to his loyalty to Vice President Cheney and also to his aversion of governmental programs, particularly those initiated by former President Clinton. However, after numerous discussions with the staffs of both the Vice President and the President, he learned that the President was a genuine supporter of the volunteerism movement in America after 9/11 and wanted to capitalize on the spirit running through the country during that time. He therefore accepted the commission. Thus began his association with the President of the United States. From Christie's vantage point, in opposition to the media, he saw the President as the leader of staff meetings who utilized the expertise of his cabinet, including the Vice President, for advice. The bottom line was that President Bush was the man in charge of the White House, not Vice President Cheney or anyone else. Period.




Christie did not turn his back on his black heritage and in fact almost resigned due to an incident by Mississippi Senator Trent Lott during Thanksgiving in 2002. While Christie was at his brother's home, Senator Lott was featured on CNN at Senator Strom Thurmond's one-hundredth birthday party. Lott was recalling Thurmond's unsuccessful bid for the presidency in 1948 and lamented that Mississippi, which was opposed to integration, was only one of four states that supported him. Lott went on to say, "We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either". Christie and his family were stunned. During the next few days in which the White House said nothing, Christie's parents asked him how could he work at the White House for a man who had refused to repudiate Lott's statement. Christie, wrestling with his admiration for President Bush and his agenda, could not sit by silently. Knowing it could cost him his job, he wrote a note to Andy Card expressing his dismay that the comment was not rebuked by the White House. Card, the Chief of Staff to President Bush and known in the White House for both his intense intelligence and hilarious practical jokes, invited Christie to a private meeting to discuss the relationship between blacks and the Republican Party. When asked to present his thoughts, Christie proposed that Republicans "should not be traveling to black neighborhoods and talking about crime, welfare reform and drugs" but should talk about "tax reform, school choice and home ownership". Rather that "bringing in the gospel choir to sing and sway in the East Wing during Black History month can't we do more than pander to those folks who then start criticizing us the second they leave the building"? Christie suggested that the President "should visit with small business leaders, doctors and investors who support his vision and happen to be black". Andy Card, displaying his honesty and sincerity, became an active participant and devoted significant amounts of his time to find ways in which the President's agenda could resonate with those who were skeptical about his policies.

Black in the White House made me feel that I was actually observing the leaders of the country on a personal level without the critical remonstrations of the media promoting their anti-Bush rhetoric. I was able to see, through Christie's eyes, the leaders in President Bush's cabinet as thoughtful, intelligent and sincere individuals who are honored to spend a few years of their lives dedicated to the President and the country. Although not intended to be an historical document, the book represents a view of the White House and the Presidency that is seldom revealed. It was refreshing to observe the White House from the perspective of someone who loves to be there rather than from someone who is there to condemn it.

This book is one of my favorites. Ron Christie's persective of the White House workings kept my attention from cover to cover. I have to tell you...his thoughts on some things made me laugh out loud and others made me cry. Thank you for the book Mr. Christie--and you are definitely not a "wart on history's nose". :-)

I suppose that if you are a guileless, hard-core reactionary, then you'll really love Ron Christie's no-fault treatise on everything good about W's Whitehouse.

While I am an AA (African-American) with moderate political views, there is something simultaneously self-satisfied and self-hating about Mr. Christie's over-the-top conservative tome in which he anecdotes countless situations in which he is the only person of color in the room (one would not count Conde Rice). Here he finds few faults with the Bush administration while describing his Horatio Algers' climb to middle management in the Republican Guard.

He breathlessly reports of his adventures in becoming one of the youngest African Americans to navigate his way into the echelons of republican politics, without any self-acknowledgment that he may, in fact, just be a "token".

I'd say it was an interesting read if you want to understand how the Republican Party simultaneously manages to find no real value in diversity, while exploiting - in a nominal way - the value of having a symbolic representative.

This is a smug account of his interactions with politicos in the West Wing and it reads like a report on "What I Did Over my Summer Vacation".

I read Ron Christie's new book as I was looking to find some insight into how the Bush White House works. Having seen the author on a number of tv programs he comes across as earnest, forthright and dedicated to the conservative cause. Unfortunately, he hasn't been in the top echelon of decision-making to warrant a good book. It's too low-level.

I wish Mr. Christie well.....there's nothing more in his book that we already know, would care to know or will find out sooner or later.

If you are looking for the proverbial "fly on the wall" perspective of the White House, this might fit the bill nicely. Christie gives a very...accessible account of what it's like to work for the President. Unfortunately, Christie's experiences (as he presents them anyway) come across as though he had about as much impact on meaningful policy as a real fly on the wall. Certain passages made me cringe as the author described being nearly paralyzed with awe every time he met high profile people for the first time.

I surely hope this was an editing error that slipped through but on page 233 Christie describes Karl Rove as being "thought by many to be the most powerful man in the White House other than the VP". If that was supposed to be a dig at Bush it's pretty unbecoming considering the way Christie fawns over W through the rest of the book. I STRONGLY suspect a junior proof-reader at publisher Nelson Current let her political views enter into her work and introduced the error as a prank. Pretty funny.

I wouldn't recommend this for those learning about politics, government and the executive branch either. It is too lean on how various departments and individuals work together to implement policy. Also lacking is any insight on how one gets to such a position.