Events Books

I highly recommend this book. While it's pretty easy to make the argument that our country is better off continuing with a secular government, what is difficult is refuting all the false rhetoric, and there is a ton of it, from those that would prefer we mutate into a Christianist nation (as Andrew Sullivan would put it). Rev. Lynn puts forth a highly readable argument that our nation's future interest is best served following the legacy of our founding framers, an argument firmly grounded in the ideals that were ratified by the founding framers in our beloved Constitution.

Lynn is also no slouch in the history department, doing a far better job for example of refuting Christian Nation historical revisionism than Jon Meacham's American Gospel: God, the Founding Fathers, and the Making of a Nation while requiring a lot less sentences to do so. In fact, Lynn sells himself short by using the back of the book cover to market his book to the choir; his respectful tone towards Christianity while defeating arguments we'd be better served with a Roy Moore fantasy could have garnered a more effective response from the public if he'd also marketed this book towards conservative Christians as well, many are whom are unaware of their sects' legacy of supporting separationism or how far their current day leaders really want to go in regards to increasing government power to endorse a particular version of faith (e.g., already working on attempting to re-supress birth control).

I'm knocking off a star for my standard reason: no footnotes, inexcusable in this day and age. As a member of the Americans United for the Separation of Church & State, I have complete trust in Rev. Lynn's integrity; but any author who wants to put forth an argument based on a set of premises should footnote those premises. I also thought his occassional references that he's pro-choice was uncalled for and reduce the odds of his changing minds of anti-abortionists. While the pro-choice platform stands a better chance of succeeding if we maintain our constitutional republic's disestablishment nature, the platform itself has little to do with the argument on whether we should continue to limit government power on religious matters. I can only assume that Rev. Lynn is out soliciting pro-choice interest groups to join AU, which I found distasteful.

As someone who has probably read too many of these separation argument books, here are some highlights I particularly enjoyed that are unique relative to other books I've read on this topic:

1. President's Grant's failed attempt to amend the constitution to remove mandatory Protestant instruction in public schools while refusing aid to religious schools to make Catholics more welcome in the public school systems; an effort that took place during one of the first times that Christianists were initially able to break down the wall somewhat (for a complete history, see Susan Jacoby's Freethinkers: A History of American Secularism).
2. The end-game objective of the Bush administration's efforts to fund religious organizations rather than government providing services directly as an end-run attempt around our civil rights.
3. The willingness of certain conservative Christian organizations to suppress speech on issues in staged debates (Rev. Lynn directly experienced this as one of the debaters), essentially stacking the deck on what questions could be posed to the forum and therefore censoring their events.

First let me say, the Rev. Barry Lynn writes very clearly and logically, so following his argument is easy. He explains what the First Amendment is, what it tries to accomplish and why we need it.

The simple truth is that most religions think they have the real truth, the whole truth and all of god's will, and hence everyone must believe in Jesus, Allah, the angel Moroni, Krishna or whoever. Even unbelieving atheists have a tendency to think they have "the real truth." The problem is, with everyone "knowing" the only and final truth, how do we live together without constantly arguing with one another. Obviously, we must be tolerant of the other fellows belief and agree to look for what we believe in common, and not constantly fight and argue.

In this situation all faiths must be treated equally, and especially the government must not prefer, or push, or support any one faith in preference to any other. It is especially important no government body, i.e. no public body, school, court, administration, etc. favor the Christian religion, because Christians are the majority, which might easily overwhelm a minority faith.

The First Amendment simply implements this concept. It informs the government to stay out of all religions, don't push any, don't even think of favoring any, don't even say a public prayer, for all prayers are sectarian supported by one but not another faith.

In Piety and Politics, the Rev. Barry Lynn makes an excellent case as to why the separation of church and state is so important for the overall health of these institutions. As Rev. Lynn points out, one need only look to other countries where religion and government walk hand in hand to see the negative effects each can have on the other.

Throughout, Lynn presents strong reasons why "religion, united with the raw power of government, spawns tyranny." Theocracies do not have the freedoms we, as Americans, cherish and religion does not need and infact suffers when the government is relied upon for support, both legislated and financial.

After a strong introduction that lays out the overall case for separation, successive chapters deal with several of the more specific area in which the Religious Right is attempting to break down the walls. From education to religious symbols to sound science, Lynn exposes the holes in the Right's arguments, provides strong arguments of his own and examines why we should all be concerned about these issues.

As a practicing Christian I am deeply grateful for writers like Rev. Lynn who are willing to speak up for the vast number of people of faith who believe strongly in the founders' foresight and wisdom in creating the first freedom, that of religion. I have no desire for the government to dictate what flavor or brand of religion will be the "chosen" one. I doubt that many people of faith do. Rev. Lynn's book provides not only great food for thought but also great words and information to use and share so we can all intelligently join this important debate and let our voices be heard.

A few years back I was listening to a news report about how first time homeowners were struggling with the complexities involved in buying their initial home. The report stated that the Bush Administration was planning on using members of its faith-based initiative to help buyers navigate the confusing maze. HUH??? What does the church have to do with offering information on buying a home? I was already aware that Bush was attempting to allow faith-based groups to discriminate in hiring despite being government funded which made this kind of handoff of government responsibility even that much more offensive. As bad as I thought it was, it was far worse and far more cynical than I ever imagined.

Rev. Barry Lynn has long been vilified by the Religious Right but the truth is he may be about the best friend Christians have. The author writes, "church-state separation has been a great boon to religion". Among industrialized nations the United States has been rather unique in its continuing observance of expressed religious faith. The United States was also groundbreaking in its establishment of a secular government. Coincidence? Barry Lynn's argument is that it is America's secularism that has allowed religion to thrive. In most European countries the churches are subsidized by the state. As Rev. Lynn states, "They want for only one thing: congregants" So why is the Religious Right so eager to kill the goose that laid the golden egg. Lynn believes that the ultimate goal of the Religious Right is to create a theocratic state with themselves in charge. I have to respectfully disagree. As little respect as I have for Dobson, Robertson and the now deceased Falwell I really doubt they believe they are going to somehow take over the American government. A much more likely scenario is that the church would be consumed by the government.

George W. Bush has been characterized as perhaps the strongest ally that Christianity has ever had in the Oval Office. The truth is the Bush Administration has used religion more cynically than probably any administration ever. The faith-based initiative was nothing more than a sop to try and woo evangelicals and finally make some headway with black voters. Bush continually used religious issues and his own purported faith to try and shore up his base and push his agendas while religious leaders like Dobson and Robertson promoted policies important to Bush and the GOP. I can remember Dobson presenting a wish list to the GOP that included eliminating the capital gains tax because I guess that's what Jesus would want.

The author writes a much needed defense against claims by Rev. Jim Wallis that the ACLU and Rev. Lynn's Americans for the Separation of Church and State are nothing more than the flip side of the Religious Right. I wrote in a review of `God's Politics' that Rev. Wallis was way off base in his attack on secularism which was a real shame because he presents himself as a bridge between fundamentalists and moderates.

Rev. Lynn's point is that it is the struggle that makes the church strong. In fact struggle is an integral part of the Christian faith. As the author writes, "Why should they give more on Sunday if they already paid taxes to support religion?" Are churches going to work harder to attract members when they're supported by the government? It wasn't secularists or atheists who pushed for separating Church and State. It was Christians who hated having the government write prayers or give tax money to other denominations or ban certain beliefs. The people who dreamed of a wall of separation between church and state lived through the results of their union. Perhaps secularists and atheists should lobby for the wall to come down. It's likely to be the easiest and quickest way to render Christianity irrelevant.

I notice that Amazon is selling Piety and Politics paired with Letter to a Christian Nation in the Best Value section. I found Piety and Politics far more readable than Sam Harris's angry polemic. Between the two this is definitely the one to get.

`Piety & Politics' by The Reverend Barry W. Lynn is a catalogue of, as the subtitle states, `The Right-Wing Assault on Religious Freedom', from his position as director of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State. For starters, let me say that I am in almost 100% agreement with everything Dr. Lynn says. He makes a far more reasoned and levelheaded case against the extremes of American fundamentalist Christians than the archly polemical `Letter to a Christian Nation' by Sam Harris. It is even superior, albeit far less broad in scope than Tony Campolo's `Speaking My Mind'. My agreement with the good Pastor Lynn may have something to do with our both having been raised in that most Christian oriented of blue state cities, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, home of, among other things, the Moravian church in America and neighbor, in Allentown, of the most important Lutheran-oriented college in the country, Muhleberg College.

If I have any argument with Pastor Lynn, it is in the fact that he does not look deep inside the psyche of the `Christian Conservative Right' and explain its workings. But, before getting further along with that thought, let me say that what Lynn has accomplished is utterly necessary and quite valuable. It reminds me of a cross between Al Franken's cleaning out the Conservative Augean stables of misrepresentations and the strategy of the first Bill Clinton presidential campaign, where his media staff examined opponents statements and news in general under a microscope, and immediately replied to any and every misstatement or refutable claim. It is that kind of vigilance which must be maintained if we are to maintain both religious and personal freedoms.

One thing which strikes me as really unfortunate about this struggle is that while Christian scriptures and the U.S. Constitution agree almost perfectly in letting the state do its thing and letting believers get on with their worship, or freedom from it, the Christian Right Wing persists in forcing their brand of belief on various venues of the country at large. One must even puzzle over how this agenda became connected with the Republican Party, since my most favorable depiction of Republican doctrine includes the principle of expanding, not limiting personal freedoms.

So, while Pastor Lynn's story is one of vigilance, it does little to help us understand the opposition.
Therefore, I offer this as a suggestion for Pastor Lynn's next book.

Please be clear that a large part of Christian doctrine involves vigorously spreading the faith, a doctrine that is amply stated in scriptures. While some denominations are more militant about it than others, bringing in new members to the Lutheran or Baptist or Anglican, or Catholic or Orthodox or Pentecostal or Presbyterian confession is on everyone's agenda. And, routine aspects of even the most mild-mannered denominations (my Lutheran denomination, for example) sound pretty militant in their native habitat. Just today we had a hymn which commanded us to be `...soldiers of the cross, Lift high his royal banner. It must not suffer loss...! Pretty strong stuff from a tame corner of Pennsylvania. Let me join this with the fact that I lived through exactly the same public school bible readings, prayers, and Christmas pageants in High School as did Pastor Lynn. For all I know, we attended Liberty High School together, albeit not in the same class. All this was quite taken for granted and pretty comfortable for an obedient Pennsylvania Lutheran teenager. One can even believe that prayers are genuinely effective in focusing our mind on the task at hand, so they would seem to be ideal as a mental ritual to get the day off right. (Of course, as Pastor. Lynn more than adequately demonstrates, things are not so rosy for the non-Protestants forced to either participate in or embarrassingly abstain from such rituals).

So if the Christian faith includes a belief in taking its message to all nations, how can a fellow Christian, the Reverend Lynn, oppose the efforts of the good Reverend doctors' Falwell, Robertson, et. al. This is surely why true Christian believers accost Dr. Lynn with such anger at Cleveland airports. One can go even further and cite the Christian doctrine that justice comes only from God (See Romans, especially), so how can courts dispense justice without Christian underpinning.

The problem with this belief is that Christians don't have a monopoly on the divine source for justice, as the Greeks had this idea at least 400 years before Christ (see The Orestean Trilogy by Aeschylus). Our legal theory does, in fact base itself on both traditions in maintaining the DISINTERESTED status of judges.

The problem with Falwell and Co, as Pastor Lynn adequately demonstrates, is that they have an almost total disregard for the truth, and consider the most transparently fallacious ad hominom arguments to be OK, as long as it's for THEIR Christian cause. The one saving grace is that they underestimate the intelligence of the American public, most of whom can sense the perversity of their arguments for what they are. The use of the worst kind of dishonest tactics coupled to an honorable doctrine leads me to the conclusion that Falwell, Robertson, et. al. are NOT interested in advancing Christianity, they are interested in personal political power. As such, they deserve no respect from honest Christians. I am all for encouraging prayer, Bible study, stirring hymns, and Christian liturgy, as long as my audience has signed on to the fait which recommends these practices.

I thank God for Pastor Lynn's vigilance and his sharing this information with us so that we can better understand this dishonesty.

Love him or hate him, Noam Chomsky serves a vital role to any thoughtful and/or politically minded individual in the United States today. By focusing on what you're NOT hearing from the major media sources and political powers, Chomsky engages his audiences by exhaustively cataloging his sources and letting them make their own decisions on what they need to do with the information.

This book represents some of the most accessible Chomsky that you can buy. Comprised of a series of interviews with Alternative Radio founder, David Barsamian, "Propaganda and the Public Mind" does exactly what you would expect it to do; exposing propaganda as a weapon used by the powerful, how it can be recognized, and showing the extraordinary impact normal people can have when they work towards the right sort of changes. Even while discussing grave issues, Noam manages to convey his faith that positive action is alive and well. As a lovely bonus to the interviews themselves, the resources section of the book will help you get as deeply into any of the subject matter as you dare.

I was thrilled by this book. If I were a doctor, I would prescribe an essay a day (which, unfortunately would only last a week for this book) as an antidote for the daily news.

This book in an important insight into how public figures make hay of the psyche of the populace. The less prepared we are to see and understand what's going on, the more they get away with and the more we and our children eventually pay for down the road. This book should be mandatory material at the highschool level.

Walter Jacques, Oklahoma City

This is an excellent book filled with great information about the world we live in. Chomsky is easy to understand in interview format and still gives loads of facts with logical conclusions.

For the price, this is a worthwhile book that presents a different perspective on politics and current events. Just be warned this is not an objective treatment on the science or implementation of propaganda. I was looking for a book that explored how propaganda works and is managed. Instead, the author spends a lot of time criticizing policy and those he considers the power elite. I appreciate the author's point of view but tend to discount criticism that doesn't come with proposed solutions, examples, supporting data and facts.

What differentiates this books from other's in Chomsky's canon is that it is a series of interviews, obviously, but in other ways it's an simplified guide to Chomsky's beliefs and journalistic pursuit of modern life. Chomsky is an amazing person and an excellent humanists and his insights will be sure to help you try to understand modern life better.

I worked for the Illinois primary committee through the full 1976 primary campaign and then attended the convention with the Illinois delegation.
I worked with Reagan's California people during the primary and Charlie Black and Roger Stone during the Illinois primary. Shirley has captured the essence of that campaign and written a book that should be a primer for any young gun that seeks to influence national politics. Well done Craig! A+.

Whether you agreed or disagreed with his policies, there's no denying that Ronald Reagan casts a long shadow over modern American politics. His landslide victory in the 1980 presidential election made conservatism the dominant theme of American politics - a theme which is running strong even today. When most people today think of Republicans, they automatically think "conservative". Yet, as Craig Shirley notes, until Reagan's victory that was not always the case. In "Reagan's Revolution", Shirley offers an engrossing account of a campaign that he (and many political historians) believe changed the face of the Republican Party, and ultimately, the nation. And it's not the 1980 campaign that Shirley is writing about. Instead, he describes Reagan's hard-fought, near-miss 1976 primary battle to unseat President Gerald Ford and capture the GOP presidential nomination. Without this losing effort, Shirley argues, Reagan would never have been nominated and elected President in 1980.

Shirley offers an excellent account of the sad state of the Republican Party in the mid-1970's. TIME magazine did a cover story in 1976 on "The Plight Of The GOP", and even hinted that the Republicans were on their way to extinction, like the Whig Party of the mid-1800's. At the grassroots level the "Grand" Old Party was outnumbered two-to-one or more by the Democrats in many parts of the country, and at the congressional level many Republicans seemed resigned to a permanent minority status. Shirley argues that the GOP's plight was mainly a result of the fact that the party had no clear agenda or direction. What passed for the GOP Establishment consisted mainly of moderate-to-slightly liberal Republicans from the Northeast, such as Nelson Rockefeller of New York, Ford's Vice-President, and Pennsylvania Senator Richard Schweiker. Reagan, the leader of the GOP's conservative wing, became increasingly disgusted with what he believed was President Ford's complacent "me too" attitude towards the Democrats.

When Reagan announced his challenge to Ford in late 1975, he was promptly opposed by most of the "Rockefeller" Republicans who still controlled the party's finances and organization. Running with only his own resources and fellow conservative insurgents, he mounted one of the strongest challenges to an incumbent President in American history. Shirley, who interviewed plenty of former aides and campaign associates for both Reagan and Ford, gives a breathless account of the fierce primary battles throughout the spring and summer of 1976. Early on it looked as if Ford would win easily, as he defeated Reagan in New Hampshire, Florida, and Illinois. After each defeat the pressure mounted on Reagan to quit the race and "join the team" for Ford. Yet Reagan refused to quit, and his persistence paid off with a stunning upset of Ford in the North Carolina primary (with some help from then-Senator Jesse Helms). After that the two men engaged in an increasingly bitter nip-and-tuck battle for delegates that lasted until August 1976, when the Republican Convention opened in Kansas City. Only then did Ford finally manage to nail down enough delegates to narrowly win the nomination, thus making 1976 the last time that a presidential nomination would still be undecided before a political convention started. Yet even in defeat, Shirley notes, Reagan "stole" the moment from Ford with a stirring and eloquent concession speech that left even many pro-Ford delegates in tears. It was at that moment, Shirley believes, that the modern "Conservative Revolution" in American politics began.

I do have one problem with the book, and that is Shirley's obvious bias towards Reagan. Shirley is a conservative activist who supported Reagan in 1976 and 1980, and while he does try to be fair to Ford and his team, it's pretty clear which side Shirley supported. Even so, the bias is not so blatant that it seriously affects the pace or flow of the story. Interestingly, neither Dick Cheney nor (especially) Donald Rumsfeld come off looking very good in Shirley's account (perhaps surprisingly, they both supported Ford instead of Reagan). Shirley describes the 1976 campaign as a good sportswriter might describe a classic World Series or Super Bowl. If you're a political junkie and have read such classics as Theodore White's "Making of the President 1960", then you should definitely enjoy this book. Recommended!

Craig Shirley has written a first class narrative of recent history in Reagan's Revolution.

It covers the 1976 Republican primary campaign, in which former California Governor Reagan challenged Republican incumbent Gerald R. Ford-- the only man to serve as American President who was never elected President or Vice-President.

Shirley does a good job of telling the story from each side of the the face-off, including the presence of current Bush administration members Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, who were members of the Ford administration.

A great work that provides insight into an important event in American history that is not often covered in such depth.

Shirley's work is also easily readable, often reading like a good novel.

Let's face it, history is effervescent with little, silent victories. The biggest victories (Waterloo, Gen. Washington, Robert Evans) always receive the press, the notoriety, and the Mucollough books (or novels, in her Lady Partisan's eyes). Now look at those little victories that receive so sparse a note. This is one of them. Now I am not a Reagan fan, I am not a conservative (I am not a Shirley of the same blood, for that matter, interestingly, I share my first name with one of whom the book is dedicated. Don't worry, I beith no rock a'tall).


Mister Shirley frankly just does a delightful job of allowing this little victory to finally breathe the air, the life it deserves. I was moved by the passages. The premise of this entire book has served as a footnote struck down by editors galore, which really allows Shirley to stretch out his pen and write as if this was a synopsis for a film based off of "Trivial Persuit." I'll explain: because this entire premise begins with so...trivial...a piece of tedium, that he has to work, to actually researce and write. His laurels lie within Washington, but in the Historical Nonfiction realm of popularity or even making a return on the original investment, Mr. Shirley is the one who must make the Book-Reader relationship work. In fact, Mr. Shirley has an even farther way to go than any other author and his or her piece, for while '76 is not chronicled (much), Reagan most certainly is, probably moreso than any other President of the 20th century. And handily, he places his name right in the top ranks of authors of these types of works. He does a fine job. He...persues...this silent victory right to its very last interesting note, and keeps the reader along the whole time. A worthy read, and a point made (double entendre if anyone's keeping score).


Note: For one of the reviews above, as far as factual errors, this book contains them only if the 150+ sources researched contain them. It seems based upon the 51 pages of bibliography that Mr. Shirley did not want to be wrong (and Rocky was simply a reference of the times, of the atmosphere, not a direct reference to any single item occuring on the stump in '76.

Craig Shirley's publication "Reagan Revolution" is a wealth for those who are seeking even even more information on Ronald Wilson Reagan. I remember thinking there needed to be a definitive account of the 1976 Republican primaries, and was glad to run across this account.

I enjoyed this book because there is so much new information about the 76 campaign and the inner workings of the Ford and Reagan teams. I felt like I learned much more about the Reagan team in 76 and really the great odds he faced in trying to unseat an incumbent president. It was especially neat to see how amazing Reagan was even without hardly any of the Republican Party establishment behind him. I think Reagan receives so much credit for his political skill, discipline, charisma, and intelligence just from this campaign.

Shirley is absolutely right in that he displays and unwraps the transformation of the GOP within this race. He understands the depth of the conservative moment, it helped since the author was a part of that movement. He also explains just how 76 was the launching ground for 1980. He understands that Ronald Reagan's political career was in many ways providential and revolutionary. Shirley's account is an exciting read and a descriptive and triumphant look at the greatest leader of the 20th Century.

Rathje's and Murphy's RUBBISH! is insightful and engaging. Their anecdotes about the ironies of environmental movements rallying behind particular causes (like McDonald's styrofoam clam shells), and their analyses of popular misconceptions about waste provide, great food for thought for policy makers and for environmentally-minded individuals concerned about the problems with waste and its disposal. Along the way, the authors demonstrate the utility of archaeological knowledge for dealing with current social challenges. This book is a really great read!

Great book. Rathje is a engaging figure that delivers a good story - the story of our garbage.

Highly recommended.

I never thought reading about garbage would be interesting - well, okay, actually I did, otherwise I would have never read this book. I mean that I didn't suspect the book would be so darn interesting. Garbage really sheds a strong light on the culture that generates it. Just think, your garbage tells us a lot about who you are. Future archaeologists are going to love digging through our old garbage in a few thousand years. Oh, what a story it will tell.

This is an overview of the University of Arizona's continuing trash sorting project started in 1972 to document the lifestyle habits of the American public through observing what we eat, what we use in household goods, etc., and then throw out. Socio, political and economic behaviors become evident while recording the fascinating finds in daily trash digging, probing, and quantifying.

This project also included studies at the now closed Fresh Kills landfill on Staten Island in New York City where holes were bored all the way to the bottom of the fill and where the studies then took on a more ominous dimension of environmental impact discoveries such as: that the breakdown of trash, even over years, is a myth. The research showed that there is little biodegradation occurring due to compaction and lack of bacterial decomposition, so the researchers found completely intact and recognizable items from food to readable newsprint- even at the bottom of the heap where it was at least 50 years old- same type discoveries of intact trash heaps discovered in ancient Rome, Greece, etc.

Most distressing of the discoveries in the landfill was the discovery of the huge quantity of "leachate"- a toxic liquid stew, that is leaking at the rate of a million gallons a day into New York Harbor.

The book concludes with recommendations on alternatives to landfill as a means to dispose of trash plus recycling and lifestyle changes.

For another enlightening read on all things trash, there is Elizabeth Royte's "Garbage Land"- a personal story of discovery of what her family's trash footprint is and where everything including recyclables ends up- a real eye-opener and an entertaining read!

"Rubbish" is a highly academic book about "The Garbage Project" at the University of Arizona's Anthropology Department. The main idea behind "The Garbage Project" is to gain information about society by analyzing garbage patterns in various locations.

Despite being a book about garbage, the contents of the book are quite diverse. The book is divided into 4 parts. The first section, An Introduction to the Garbage Project, gives the background of "The Garbage Project", why it started, what they do, and what they hope to accomplish. This section also discusses how anthropologists use garbage to learn about ancient civilizations. The second section, The Landfill Excavations, discuss the basic theories of landfills, how the team takes samples from landfills, and discusses why biodegradation does not work in landfills. The third section, Interlude: Diapers and Demographics, I found to be highly entertaining. This section has a fascinating chapter on estimating the population of a neighborhood (as well as sex and age) based on the garbage collected from this neighborhood (a study done to initially help the Census Bureau). This section is also filled with useless information such as "There is a link between owning a cat and reading "The National Enquirer"". There is also a detailed discussion about disposable diapers in landfills. The final section, Garbage and the Future, was the most educational by far. This part discusses the serious shortcomings of citywide recycling programs and side effects people never hear about. There are also discussions on alternate garbage disposal methods, such as high tech incinerators used to generate electricity, as well as several other attempts at using technology to turn garbage into a useful product. The section and the book end with a chapter on reducing and addressing garbage disposal.

I think this book will not be for everyone. The book reads like a Master's Thesis at times, rather long and seems to ramble. However, some parts of the book are exceptional (such as the chapter on recycling or "Closing the Loop") and are really an eye opener.

I'd recommend this book to anyone interested in Environmental Sciences. Also, if you can manage to wade through pages of various scientific theories and facts, I'd highly recommend picking this book up! While a little slow reading at times, it is quite informative and I think a real eye opener.

It is truly unfortunate that Von Mises is perhaps the most overlooked 20th Century champion of free market capitalism. His brilliant observations have heavily influenced the momentous (and much more revered) works of Friedrich Hayek, as well as subsequent scholars such as Murray Rothbard, Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell, and others. Von Mises is the one who towers over almost every other laissez-faire economist (except Adam Smith and few others). His insightful formulations devastated the incessant obfuscations of the socialists and demonstrated, once and for all, the comparative benefits of a free market system.

At the heart of SOCIALISM is the argument that economic calculation is impossible without a free market. Von Mises effectively drove home the need for a market price in order to regulate the supply and demand of human society. Recent proposals for socialized medicine completely deny this importance of the price system: if the price of medicine (for consumers) is zero, the demand will be astronomical, and the doctors and other medical personnel will not be capable of effectively meeting such demand. Few proponents of "universal health care" ever address this concern, which colorfully evidences their lack of interest in -- or understanding of -- Von Mises' penetrating contentions.

"The market is a democracy in which every penny gives a right to vote. . . . Every individual is free to disagree with an election campaign or of the market process. But in a democracy he has no other means to alter things than persuasion. If a man were to say: 'I do not like the mayor elected by majority vote; therefore I ask government to replace him by the man I prefer,' one would hardly call him a democrat. But if the same claims are raised with regard to the market, most people are too dull to discover the dictatorial apirations involved." (p. 490) Von Mises had the presence of mind to fully discern the tyrannical motivations behind most calls for a collectivist arrangement. He knew that the grotesque desires of the elite would inevitably eclipse the true inclinations of man. More than an economic dissertation, SOCIALISM was an expression of human justice, as illuminated by the deference the author paid to the individual autonomy of the common man. Respect for the personal choices of others is, after all, the defining characteristic of freedom.

Regardless of the self-serving configurations of the statists and their innumerable followers, the free market works, as evidenced by the fact that even the poor feely partake in such a system and usually enjoy a much higher standard of living than even the average citizen in socialist nations. As the American federal government continues to expand at an alarming rate, we would do well as a society to better familiarize ourselves with the philosophies of Von Mises and his progeny. Reading SOCIALISM would be a start in the right direction. Those of us who have already surveyed the book should recommend it to as many thoughtful (and open-minded) people as we know. Day by day, one person at a time, we can begin to recover and restore our devotion to liberty as a society. As the author of this tremendous book well knew, the voluntary exchange of a free market will almost always be more efficient and preferable than the coercive force of government. The hollow promises of a big, active, all-intrusive state will always lure a great percentage of our soicety -- most of them well-meaning, but averse to logic and evidence -- yet such dreams always provide the essential fuel for despotism. A return to our federalist roots (in which the states are sovereign entities rather than ineffectual subsidiaries of the federal government) and to the free market principles of Smith and Von Mises would serve us well in our on-going struggle against state-sponsored tyranny.

This is THE definitive work on the impracticality, impossibility and immorality of socialism. Von Mises, who observed socialism first hand before having to flee his home in Europe, and who lived through the age of great collectivist experiments, has written a simply devastating critique. The (supposed) reader below who wrote the review entitled "Propogating Utopian Fallacies", obviously either has not read the book, or completely misunderstood the entire thing. A more ignorant review of this book can hardly be imagined. He makes several dubious assumptions in his review and attributes them to Von Mises. He makes statements like, "Mises doesn't understand," or "Mises believes" and then proceeds to use these statements to try to refute the idea of free markets. He also fails to apply his own logical excercises to himself. For example he states that if Mises were consistent, he would have rejected all government and not just some collectivist programs. Yet the reviewer seems to be a believer in a half-way system where markets are mixed with socialism, "democracy", and government intervention. I guess he must have a monopoly on believing that governments should do some things and leave others to the anarchy of the market. Anyone familair with the rest of Mises's works and with free market and libertarian theory in general can't help but laugh at the claims he makes. This reviewer clearly does not understand property rights based, modern anarchist theory (as opposed to the Rage Against the Machine variety which he makes reference to), nor does he understand this book. The claims he makes in the last paragraph of his reveiw are so outlandish and naive that they do not even warrant a response. An important lesson can be gained here though. Without some prior (correct) understanding of concepts like markets, anarchy, liberty, the true nature of government, and without some understanding of logical processes, it is easy to fall prey to such overly-simplified arguments. I would recommend along with this book, also reading other books by authors such as Mises, Murray Rothbard, Henry Hazlitt, and F.A. Hayek.

Does anything else need to be said?

October 25th 1817- The Bolsheviks stage a coupe in Petrograd and overthrow the Kerensky regime. For the first time ever Marxists seize control of a major nation. It will be several years before the Bolsheviks overwhelm their opponents within Russia. However, one question demands an answer. Will it work? Can socialism at least match the results of capitalism? The full answer to this question came in 1922- the year that Mises published Socialism, an Economic and Sociological Analysis. Here Mises proved that socialism must fail.

Why must socialism fail? The simple answer is because it lacks private ownership and a market for the means of production. As Mises put it "where there is no market there is no price system, and where there is no price system there can be no economic calculation". The full answer has several parts. First, economic calculation requires functioning financial markets. Second, economic calculation requires actual rivalry in markets. Third, economic calculation requires entrepreneurial alertness to profit opportunities. With these three elements in place monetary calculation of private profit reflects true economic costs. As Mises put it economic calculation "is essentially a matter for the capitalists- the capitalists who buy and sell stocks and shares, who make loans and recover them, who make deposits in the banks and draw them out of the banks again, who speculate in all kinds of commodities". Perpetually changing economic conditions mean that- "it is above all necessary that capital should be withdrawn from particular lines of production, from particular undertakings and concerns and should be applied in other lines of production, in other undertakings and concerns". Speculation in financial markets directs resources to the most urgent consumer demands because the most profitable ventures satisfy consumer demand at the least economic cost. Socialism fails because it lacks speculation that takes place only with entrepreneurial rivalry and exchange in financial markets.

The issue of economic calculation is economic, but Mises also inquired into the political and psychological reasons behind the socialist movement. He also discusses historical and cultural issues. Socialism is a full-scale treatise, comparable to Smith's Wealth of Nations. Some might think that a book from 1922 might have lost its relevance, but this is untrue. Mises explained principles that are as valid today as they were originally. In fact, Socialism is more relevant today than many recent books on economics. This is because Mises dealt with the real life problems of a dynamic economy, while much of modern economics focuses on static models that apply only to imaginary economic conditions.

Socialism is not only Mises' best book; it is one of the greatest works ever written on social theory. Mises addressed vital issues with penetrating analysis and delivered profound results. All those who are serious about political economy should read this book, but only after having read Menger's Principles of Economics, and before reading Hayek's Road to Serfdom. Those who are less ambitious should read a shorter book by Mises- Liberalism in the Classical Tradition. In any case, Socialism is a towering intellectual achievement. Were its arguments more widely understood many of the tragedies of 20th century state socialism might have been avoided. This book remains important today because it explains why we live in an age of unprecedented prosperity, and how we can achieve further progress. To put it simply Socialism is as indispensable to intellectual development as property rights are to economic development.

Mises' Socialism is, perhaps, the most sociologically and economically "sound" theoretical attack on socialism to date. Happily, Dr. Mises' general position has been promulgated in economic journals since the post-war generation, and is the topic of the still relevant "calculation debate." It is not so pleasant that the insights of Mises are largely ignored by the sociology profession (probably because most sociologists continue to be prepossessed by Marxian materialism). However, sociologists who are seduced by the Marxian doctrine will be interested in this theoretical work because it asserts that social life can only be completely transformed, for the worst, under a centrally planned socioeconomic system. Further, Mises' erudition is manifest as he demolishes the work of Karl Marx and other utopians.

The central insight in this text for sociology is that "socialism" must manufacture an "artificial market." That is, a non-private property based market economy where managers will be given incentives in order to perform as private private owners who do business in a socioeconomic system analgous to "rational capitalism." This implication of an overhaul of social institutions (e.g., legal and monetary institutions) is a trenchant one. Hence, the idea of socialism is largely a sociopolitical problem, and one must move outside the perimeters of economic theory in order to address them. And Mises does just that!

The economic and sociological acumen in this work makes the price a steal. I must add, however, that more social scientists outside of economics need to read this tome because one cannot truly understand "society" without an understanding of economics.

SOX AND THE CITY IS WRITTEN BY RICHARD ROEPER WHO IS ALSO A MOVIE CRITIC ALONG WITH ROGER EBERT IN CHICAGO AND THEY HAVE A SYNDICATED TV SHOW. I REALLY LOVED THIS BOOK. I AM NOT A SOX FAN BUT AN INDIANS FAN AND I KNOW MANY MANY SEASONS HAVE PASSED SINCE A WORLD SERIES VICTORY. ROPER BRINGS BACK MUCH NOSTALGIA FROM BASEBALL IN THE 1960'S TO PRESENT DAY. I REALLY ENJOYED THE SEGMENTS ABOUT THE 1967 TEAM AND DICK ALLEN. I ESPECIALLY RECOMMEND THIS FOR ALL SOX FANS AND EVEN IF YOU ARE NOT, THIS IS AN EXCELLENT READ FOR ALL BASEBALL FANS. HE DOES A GREAT JOB DESCRIBING IN DETAIL HOW THE 2005 SEASON WENT WITH SOME GREAT BEHIND THE SCENES STORIES. I THINK THE ONE MAIN THING I ENJOYED MOST WAS HIS EXPERIENCES FOLLOWING THE SOX AS A CHILD WHEN WE ARE YOUNG AND NAIVE AND HOPE IS ETERNAL. A MUST READ.

Roeper writes very well for a journalist (ha-ha), and this book was both funny and captured the essence of being a White Sox fan. He takes you through his personal experience of being fan from his childhood in the 1960s to attending the World Series in 2005. The book would be a fun read even if you were not a White Sox fan as Roeper includes a lot of jokes about pop culture such as movies and music, and many of the stories of being a fan are universal regardless of the team.

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

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

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

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

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

All literate White Sox fans should read this book.

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

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

If you love baseball, pick this one up!

Tales From the Networking Community provides a pragmatic, common sense approach to the art,and skill,of effective networking. Using anaologies, stories and "tales" Dan Williams does a very good job of laying out the basic concepts required to develop and leverage business relationships. A good,quick read!

This book shows readers the importance of establishing a business relationship with other business owners and promoting another business. How better can we live our lives in "Faith, Hope, and Charity" than by promoting a friend's business. A referral for another comes back to you one-hundred fold. This book is a must read for every Home-Based-Business or regular business owner that wishes to make money in the marketplace. Thanks, Dan for showing us the way. Read the book and succeed!

What a terrific job Dan Williams has done to create an essential guide for doing business in the 21st Century. Williams' understanding of the importance of relationship building and networking in today's marketplace is right on target.
For anyone interested in building a successful and enduring business, this little ditty is a must read.

Any person serious about networking in the business world must read this book and memorize certain passages. There is no reason to re-invent networking when you have this book in hand. Thanks to Dan for a marketing masterpiece written for the layman. Everything I ever learned about networking is covered and placed in proper perspective in this powerful book.

Business professionals would do well to read this insightful and helpful look into business networking from an author with extensive experience both here in the Washington DC market and in other states as well.

Dan provides an easy read that draws the reader into real life experiences noted first hand from a thought leader of networking.

Jeff Arnette, Professional Networkers Alliance, Chair

As it turns out, what Philippe Sands has exposed in Torture Team: Rumsfeld's Memo and the Betrayal of American Values is the well-documented truth, reinforced by the power of Internet access, of how the Bush Administration's political agenda poisoned the fundamentals of this Nation's long-held leadership in human rights. A Professor of Law at University College in London and Academic Member of the prestigious Matrix Chambers where he specializes in international law, this Queen's Counsel is an unlikely but welcomed chronicler of what has happened to the rule of law in this country during the past seven years.

Building upon a few fundamental documents that first came to light in response to the scandal at Abu Ghraib, he pulled together an impressive list of first-person interviews of those legally involved and turned the most commonly thought perceptions of the cause of the abuses in Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib on their head! Sands narrative takes us through an entangled chronology of events more in the manner of a storyteller rather than a legal scholar with refreshing results. His analysis is quite clear. While some may insist that these actions were merely part of a process that first stretched the boundaries of our laws and then later corrected itself, others believe that binding international laws and treaties were either ignored or deliberately overlooked by those involved.

Although the author offers great praise for America's legal professionals both within the military and the Government, the fact that we as a Nation have collectively acted in this manner should be very sobering for all of us. Be you zealot, patriot or cynic, America's abhorrence of inhumane treatment dates back to the days of Lincoln. Cruelty, humiliation and the use of torture were prohibited by international law with the Geneva Convention and reinforced by the Convention Against Torture in 1984, which criminalized such acts. Additionally, Sands discussion of the actual trials of lawyers at Nuremberg, watching Stanley Kramer's classic Judgment at Nuremberg again, pondering the underlying principles and the parallels raised and the popularizing of the myth 'that torture works' by Jack Bauer and the Emmy-winning '24 - Season One' television series that began in 2002 adds a contemporary twist to this book.

While its revelations and his conclusions may never be echoed in any global forums or international halls of justice, Sands words will hopefully resonate within each of us and inspire some old-fashioned American soul searching for all of us.

Bob Magnant is the author of The Last Transition... - a fact-based novel about Iran, Iraq and the Middle East.

A great read. Gives you the inside story and the truth regarding the top level involvement of government officials like Don Rumsfeld, Willion Haynes, Dick Cheney in the formulation of our current torture policy in violaation of international law.

Philippe Sands, a respected barrister and Queen's Counsel in the Matrix Chambers in England, as well as a Professor of International Law at University College London, writes a comprehensive and well-researched book that permits the reader to understand the process whereby torture became an accepted part of the fabric of the Global War on Terror. By interviewing many of the major players, and having access to many of the principal documents and memoranda, Philippe Sands takes us on a ride through the labyrinth of the Department of Defense that led to the harsh and brutal treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo. The research is factual and surprisingly forceful, and the ability to get many of the architects to open up and give their views makes the book both informative and eminently readable. And yet, despite a walk down a difficult road that leaves the reader with no doubts as to the current Administration's views of the benefits of torture, the author manages to keep the book dispassionate and focused..and the author finds heroes in the Armed Forces who stand out for their courage and commitment to legality. One senses that this book will become required reading for those lawyers who will specialize in human rights whether in the United States of America or in the Europe. Research such as this will form the fabric on which future historians will judge current events and make legal judgments. It should be required reading for all those interested in the study of human rights and its application today.

After seeing Sands on Moyers, I ordered this book. The detail he brings to the possible prosecution of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Yoo/Haynes/Feith for war crimes is remarkable. His interview with Dr. Abigail Seltzer in evaluating whether the treatment of Detainee 063 constituted torture is unsurpassed. His summation in Chapter 25 lays out the case with assistance from Lord Wright, who chaired the United Nations War Crimes Commission. Such a fine read!

Philippe Sands QC, Professor of Law at University College London, wrote the acclaimed Lawless World. In this new book he investigates how the US state introduced aggressive interrogation techniques at Guantanamo and elsewhere.

He interviewed key figures in the US Department of Defense, including Douglas Feith, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, Major General Michael Dunlavey, Commanding Officer of the Joint Task Force Guantanamo until 8 November 2002, General Richard Myers, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and General James Hill, Commander of US Southern Command.

Sands shows that the highest US authorities authorised criminal acts. As Abraham Lincoln said in 1863, "military necessity does not admit of cruelty ... nor of torture to extract confessions." Aggressive interrogation techniques, as well as being immoral, are unnecessary because they are unreliable, and they are also counter-productive because they discredit the user, undermine the user side's war effort and increase the risks to the user side's POWs. A National Defense Intelligence College study of 2006 concluded that there was almost no scientific evidence to support their use.

Yet in February 2002, President George W. Bush ruled that none of the Guantanamo detainees could rely on any of the protections granted by the Geneva Conventions. This ruling was intended to remove all constraints on interrogation, as Douglas Feith confirmed to Sands. On 2 December 2002 Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld signed an `Action Memo' one of whose four attachments authorised the use of eighteen interrogation techniques. These all contravened US Army Field Manual 34-52, the rule book for military interrogation, and broke Common Article 3 of the Conventions, which prohibits cruel or inhumane treatment and `outrages upon personal dignity', without exceptions for `necessity' or national security.

Further, as former Defense Secretary James Schlesinger concluded in his report, "the augmented techniques for Guantanamo migrated to Afghanistan and Iraq where they were neither limited nor safeguarded." US pressure also led British forces in Iraq to adopt more aggressive interrogation techniques, as Brigadier Ewan Duncan, responsible for British HUMINT operations, acknowledged to Sands.

In June 2006 the US Supreme Court ruled that Bush's decision was unlawful and that Common Article 3 applied to all Guantanamo detainees. As Justice Anthony Kennedy said, "violations of Common Article 3 are considered `war crimes'." All acts of torture and all acts of complicity or participation in torture are criminal offences.

After having to climb through so many books looking for the information I required to understand the issues and response to terrorism I came across Understanding Terrorism by Maniscalco & Christen. What a relief to find a comprehensive, cohesive and no nonsense book.

These authors have done a remarkable job with synthesizing complex data and rendering it into a discussional and informational manner easily comprehended by all emergency planners and responders. The constant reinforcement of "system" play and interoperability as well as a function rather than an agency approach lent great assistance to my team being able to immediately apply the knowledge to the crafting of our contingency response templates.

Great job by the composers, fantastic text for you or your organization!

This book is fantastic. It articulates the issues in a discussional format and make sense of the many confusing topics of terrorism planning and response.

I like the fact that the authors have taken the time to include a very robust reference appendix section. It has proven to be unquestionably my go to book on this subject matter.

In addition to the front matter which is invaluable, I now have to only grab one book to reference the myriad of references, case in point is the streamlined access to federal response plan, MSDS sheets, radiological references etc.

If you are an operator, supervisor, manager, planner or instructor this text is for you!

A lot of books on terrorism response have been written by 'experts'; fine folks who understand the theory, but in reality lack the practical experience. This book is NOT one those.

The authors are well organized, show their writing experience, as well as their provider and leadership experience.

The book is a comfortable read, not a scholarly tome that is an alternative to Xanax. Illustrations are good.

If you have a need to plan for medical response to terrorism, this book is an excellent resource to aid in your preparations.

The authors of Understanding Terrorism have done a great job with presenting complex and difficult material in a manner that is easy for all responders to understand.

This book covers all the bases and met all of my expectations. It has become a permanent fixture in my response bag should I need a ready reference. Frankly, this is perhaps the best book on the subject for emergency responders that I have seen to date. A great value for the price!

I was skeptical at first about another book on terrorism. After being disappointed by several other terrorism response books allegedly written for emergency planners and responders, I was very satisfied with Understanding Terrorism and Managing The Consequences.

This book is a breath of fresh air that restores my confidence that responders who have the experience and background of planning for & operating at terrorist events are sharing their expertise & knowledge.

Understanding Terrorism provides you the VITAL information you need to perform your duties as a responder as well as provides security directors & safety managers expanded knowledge on what is expected for their functional areas in times of terrorist events.

The information is provided in a cohesive manner that aids the users with easy comprehension and utility of the material. It also compiles all the needed references under one cover to make your job easier.

The approach the authors have adopted with this book is a big bonus. Frankly I am tired of books that adopt a "shotgun" approach or use theoretical [terminology] to convey the message of safe and effective response strategies; they fail to address the implementation and operational application issues effectively. THAT IS NOT THE CASE WITH UNDERSTANDING TERRORISM. This book helped me each step of the way as well as provides me with the benefit of being a "one book" planning and response reference.

Public or private sector emergency managers, responders or security officials, if you are responsible for the emergency response, Understanding Terrorism is the one book you should own, read and use.

If you want to know the truth about the medical system and the enormous number of errors and cover-ups within that system, read this book. Well-researched with many shocking and heart-breaking case studies, the book provides answers as well as showing the problems. Thank goodness someone had the courage to buck the system and break down the Wall of Silence for all of us.

This is a better book by far than the unfortunately better known INTERNAL BLEEDING. It is certainly more honest. It has the clear advantage of being written by people who know and understand the subject ,and unlike Internal Bleeding, it does not suffer the disadvantage of having been written by physicians who, purposfully or otherwise, seem very intent in obscuring the responsibility for medical mistakes.

The authors of Wall of Silence have written an honest and valuable book deciding (to the public's advantage) to let the chips fall where they may. A MUST READ!!

This book is a well researched, well written must read for all Americans. The authors share their personal story as well as the stories of others who have suffered at the hands of a careless physician. While the stories will break your heart, they may also save your life, or the life of someone you love. While none of us want to believe that those we trust with our bodies and our lives would neglect a sacred trust, the fact is it is happening all too often. This book delivers the message without hype, fear or hysteria. Read it, share it and take it with you.

What separates Wall of Silence by Gibson and Singh from other books on this topic is the refreshing and bold truth telling contained within it's human stories of pain, injustice and frustration. Not only did the authors shoulder the risks and courage requisite for listening to and then writing about the human face, consequences and devastation of needless medical error tragedies, but they also ferreted out and exposed the ugly truths, told by medical providers themselves, about how the pervasive greed, secrecy and code of silence in the healthcare industry works to bury medical mistakes through a host of means; including blackballing and burying the careers of the competent and ethical medical providers who dare to tell the truth and who place patients above profits. As a medical provider, I can find no better way to encapsulate the meaning and hope of this treatise than through those words offered by the Former First Lady Rosalynn Carter. This book is, as she states, 'A call to arms for families who have had loved ones disabled or die in the pursuit of medical treatment.' And, I can only hope that it could also catalyze a 'Call to Arms' for medical providers who wish to return medicine and healthcare to the patient oriented, compassionate, ethical and hippocratic way of practice.

If even one person dies, that is one too many. But it is not just one, not even 10 or 100 patients who are maimed and dying from health care mistakes. As Gibson and Singh reveal, the numbers are much much higher than that. And anyone of them could be you or your loved ones. Medical errors do not discriminate. Everyone is vulnerable even doctors themselves as patients.

Yes, to error is human but that really doesn't appear to be the problem here. A great deal of the problem appears to be that a percentage of health care providers make multiple errors because no one stops them. According to Grayson and Singh many nurses do not recommend their place of employment to their family and friends.

When people are not held accountable for their actions and the consequences of those actions everyone is endangered. Taking or being forced to take personal responsiblity for your actions and their consequences plays a large part in how many mistakes you make.

I would think it would be every irresponsible health care provider's nightmare to literally have to personally experience everything that they inflict on their patients.

Since health care providers are safe from the magic wishing wand, the next best thing is to guard against such mistakes and be public with the information. It is a matter of ethics. When you are ten and don't want to "rat out" a buddy it is rarely life or death. But health care providers are not ten anymore and it is their ethical obligation to put the safety their patients or potential patients first. Please read this book and tell others about it. All of our lives depend on it.