Events Books

I completely enjoyed reading this book. The author does an excellent job of writing about real events and what he learned from each one. As a fellow firefighter, I have to say that I've been through a lot of the same experiences and have come to some of the same conclusions. You may find some of the philosophical discussions distracting, but they are presented well and are integral to the book. I would recommend this book for any firefighter or firefighter family!

This is a good book on Volunteer Firefighters. My husband chuckled everytime he read an anecdote that reminded him of his volunteer fire department over the last 25 years.

This is a great book, I live about 15 miles from his volunteer Fire house, and I am a volunteer fire fighter myself. I just became a volunteer about 2 months ago, and so far my fire house and his seem very a like. This book, lets the world know what goes on in a small town volunteer fire departments like my own. Perfect book, describes everything in great detail, and is a great read, I could not put it down.

I highly recommend Dr. Frank's book as it shows us so adroitly how each of us can gain wisdom and love for our fellow man through service to our community. It is also a great tribute to the firefighters and EMTs across the country who keep us safe every day and night (with no holidays off). I would expect that the average firefighter, if there is such a thing, is not likely to write a book about his experiences. Dr. Frank, an outsider like ourselves when he joins their ranks, carries us into their world and helps us see what these amazing people do and why they do it.

As an attorney who first became a volunteer firefighter at the tender age of 45, I found this book to be a great read. I have used it as a way to try to explain to others (my family, mostly) why someone my age would become a volunteer. I found the book to be well written, enlightening, and best of all, funny. I highly recommend it.

I voted for this guy twice. This book makes me stop and wonder why ? Far be it for me to slam the president of the USA - BUT - this book makes you wonder if he has all the facuties necessary to be president of the local YMCA. It will make you think hard about the next election

Good Buy

Z

Utter Incompetents, $24.95 Amazon.com, runs three hundred pages. This hardback from Thomas Oliphant is about government and politics, more specifically the Bush Administration and its many failings; a woeful energy policy, the bungled response to Hurricane Katrina, the Iraq War, and the Republican loss of Congress. Oliphant's book is especially potent when investigating the legacy George W. Bush leaves behind.

The book examines the firings of twelve Republican US Attorneys - a political flap attributed to a memo generated by Karl Rove in 2004. These strategic, politically-motivated DOJ firings cost Gonzales his position as Attorney General. Oliphant then reaches back to explain how Bush came to be elected, how he chose his Veep, and the tremendous corporate influence on Bush's Cabinet.

The crux of Oliphant's book is this - George W. Bush's Administration and a Republican-led Congress have damaged the conservative cause. Oliphant intimates Bush blew it when it came to John DiIulio and his `faith based' initiatives. Furthermore, everything Bush has touched has turned into major catastrophe; his presidency is a textbook case of narrow political success squandered by massive governmental failure.

Energy policy was Bush's supposed strength, but his record ranged from dereliction, to inattention, to special interest favoritism. His inaugural year created a price-gouging mess that rages unabated, and electrical brownouts and triple-rate price hikes that occurred in California were the result of fraud and price/supply manipulation. Two-term Presidents are both effective and responsive, or failures; Bush is the latter.

Reforms for the health care system as proposed by President Bush have been astonishingly unrealistic, and only Americans with large incomes would benefit. Representative Rahm Emanuel derided Bush's initiatives for their "absence of appeal to ordinary Americans for whom up-front payments for personal insurance would be an extreme hardship," and stated that Bush "does nothing to expand the number of insured."

Inattention to global warming has also made Bush look weak. The American public has realized that Bush used his presidential power to serve the needs of special interest groups (for example, coal-fired power plants) instead of shoring up conservative environmental principles, and they disapprove of his political subterfuge in these areas. Bush also hobbled the FDA through cronyism and mismanagement.

Despite pledges to funnel $1.7 billion annually to poverty related organizations operated by churches, less than $1 billion was being distributed through religious organizations at the end of Bush's first term. The money given to `faith based' initiatives, however, failed to offset the increase in poverty that occurred throughout Bush's first term. Bush also squandered choice opportunities for comprehensive immigration reform.

In botching the economy and ignoring kitchen table issues, Bush created conditions that lost the G.O.P. control of Congress in 2006. Between 2001 and 2006, corporate profits in the U.S. nearly doubled, while worker's wages dipped 3 percent. And while worker's wages have remained flat, the cost of necessities (daycare, education, electricity, food, gas, health care, and housing) has spiraled.

One topic Bush failed at specifically concerns tax cuts. Bush has absolutely no strategy for rescuing his dear cuts for high-income earners and investors from their 2010 expiration dates. Activist Bruce Bartlett (who served under Reagan and Bush Sr.) attributes growing discontent on the right, to a growing conviction that Bush Junior blew a historic opportunity and hurt the conservative cause.

The great tragedy of the Bush legacy is this - gargantuan deficits. This is indefensible because Bush took office with a projected $5.6 trillion dollar surplus, then squandered it on costly wars (Afghanistan and Iraq), and large tax cuts. Additionally, Bush and his supporters elevated old-fashioned pork barrel spending ($30 billion in 2006 alone) to new highs as the deficit ballooned.

Sadly, Oliphant predicts, the Bush Administration will be remembered mostly for the murderous mess it made in Iraq. Bush will inevitably be held accountable for the botched occupation; also for his myopic refusal to plan for the unforeseen and his inability to make adjustment to the war plan as needed. Every American should take their blinders off and read this important book.

I cannot understand how Congress has not started impeachment proceedings against the Bush/Cheney criminal conspiracy. It is plain to many of us that it is more than incompetence and this book proves it.

Oliphant hits the nail on the head. To say I'm not a Bush supporter is an understatement. Now I more clearly understand why. Bush supporters will hold this book in disdain precisely it is so true. For all of "W's" failings it would be charitable to have pity on him. And also on our nation for having him as our president. Oliphant mentions that Bush reads 100 books a year. I'm suprised he can color that fast. This is a frightening, but revealing read.

Despite its unnecessarily ungracious title and dust jacket photos, I purchased UTTER INCOMPETENTS with cautious enthusiasm. Seeing Tom Oliphant's name on the cover, I immediately saw the book's physically unimposing but sprightly author on the TV screen of my mind's eye - wire-rimmed glasses in place, intentionally anachronistic bow tie neatly resting beneath his chin - opining with his cautious phrasing and sly humor on the politics of the day. Ah-h-h, I thought, 250 - 300 pages of Mr. Oliphant's gentle wit and well-tempered wisdom.

While UTTER INCOMPETENTS is not without its merits, this book is regrettably rather less than I expected it to be. Mr. Oliphant sets out with the best of intentions. All Presidents have successes and failures, he notes, but in the seven years to-date of the Bush II Administration, how has it been possible to have almost nothing but failures? How could a President turn every opportunity into disaster, every disaster into sheer chaos and even death, every small victory into ignominious defeat? What do all these failures have in common, either systemically or from the nature of the personalities involved?

From the start, the author singles out his main causes: "...tight ruling circles; a strong penchant for insularity and secretiveness; intense ideological motivation with a strong mixture of hubris; strong ties to demanding interest group supporters; and an obvious backseat for the habits of traditional policymaking that emphasize transparency and the give-and-take of consensus-building compromise" (page 21). Oliphant adds three more factors later, unwillingness to compromise, excessive cronyism, and the repeated choosing of actions that maximize short-term political gains at the expense of longer-term objectives. Invariably, reality ultimately overtakes the misleading statements from the political short-term and leads to squandered opportunity and systemic distrust and citizen disapproval, reflected in President Bush's steady decline five-year decline in approval ratings.

The remaining 90% of the book consists entirely of recaps of various Bush failures. Oliphant runs them off chapter-by-chapter as though from a punch list: oil prices, environmental protection, health care, global warming, immigration, the economy and deficits, taxes, Social Security privatization, gay marriage, Katrina, Terry Schiavo, and anything and everything associated with Iraq and terrorism. Unfortunately, each example consists mostly of recapping the events themselves, with occasional but far-too-superficial references back to his causative factors - the closed bubble of advisors, the hubris and ideological inflexibility, the stubborn resistance to changing course. In one of his best lines, Oliphant observes that Presidents must recognize "at their level of responsibility the most navigable distance between two points is rarely a straight line."

In the end, UTTER INCOMPETENTS represents an entertaining compendium of the trials and tribulations of George Bush's Presidency, but little else. Oliphant introduces no new information regarding these events, nothing that couldn't be found from a little Internet searching and back issues of newsweeklies, newspapers, and a few political journals. There are no surprising facts garnered from personal, insider interviews, no journalistic legwork, no confidential sources. Instead, Mr. Oliphant delivers a catalog of events and failed policies wrapped loosely around the simple and not overly insightful premise that they share in common the isolation, ideologically-driven certitudes, and gross incompetence of a few individuals who took valued political power over the best interests of a country and its people. Combine these factors with a Republican-controlled Congress that shared this vision of political power and abandoned its Constitutional role as a check and balance on Executive Branch power, and you have the shambles that now constitutes the Bush II Presidency.

Tom Oliphant's prose reads easily, and his recaps of events and issues are concise and on point. As a refresher of what the years since 2000 have wrought, UTTER INCOMPETENTS is an entertaining and competent compendium. As an analysis of how and why, it is less so. Already well informed readers will likely have the reaction, "Been there. Done that." On balance, three stars for a book that could have been much deeper, much more thoughtful and analytical from someone who ostensibly makes a living doing just that.

Run don't walk..... before the impending marathon of onslaught writing before the election this is the power bar.

I just finished this book and felt the need to review it (something I almost never do) because I not only did I find it profoundly illuminating but also really, really, really enjoyed reading it!

As both a personal and public narrative it is an extremely fun and entertaining read despite the fact that often deals with complex, multifaceted issues. Admittedly, I'm far from an expert on many of the themes and subjects within, however my sense is even if you are, even if you are a political historian or life long liberal this book will tell you things you didn't know and/or provide a prospective totally absent in the mainstream and alternative medias.

Wolves does not seek to provide answers to our political woes, but it does ask all the right questions (of all the right people), a fact which I think proves Marshall's desire to find genuine solutions to the socio-economic mess America finds itself in.

I highly recommend picking it up!

Very interesting, well written, and disturbing.

Read it, then talk about the elections.

I feared that by exposing the Democrats as faux liberals, Stephen Marshall would bring me into even a deeper state of despair. As I read, I found myself in just the opposite state -- happily taking in every page with new hope that there exists here in America this level of awareness and acuity and most importantly, passion. If this man understands society on this level, there is the possibility of nurturing and spreading this wisdom. I find I have someone to follow. If you need something to believe in, read this book.

This is the story of the death of American Liberalism, told by some of the very people who helped kill it. Far from the typical liberal claptrap or conservative diatribe, Marshall's fiercely independant examination of the left's rightward drift is a unique, character driven narrative that keeps you turning pages.

I'm very lucky to find this book, because it will helps me to learn English. But I think it's good also for everybody because the book teach us the correct name of the things that we need day by day.
It's my second by at Amazon and I'm very happy
Cordially,
Luzia

This is the kind of dictionary I needed. When you want to know how to say a concrete concept you will understand better if you use this picture dictionary.

Please review the book I ordered its call word by word picture dictionary, second edition

I was lucky enough to be in a situation where my adult ESL classroom had enough in-classroom copies for all students to use during classtime. I used this almost everyday. It's a fantastic way to teach new vocabulary, especially when you combine its use with other teaching tools, such as acting out motions. I often had my students use the books to quiz each other. This is a good resource, and if you can get enough copies for everyone in your class to share, DO IT!

I host foreign exchange students and the first few weeks this helps them out till they get just a better grasp of the English language. Most come with a very good understanding, but if they need to go to the doctor's or something this picture dictionary is just the thing to help out. It is useful around the house also.

The writing is straightforward and the story is fast-paced. The book furnished me with a far greater appreciation than I had of the difficulty and complexity of conducting a national campaign and of the demands made upon the candidates and the many workers, mostly volunteers, who surround and assist them. The personality and character of the narrators comes through quite clearly and with considerable honesty and self-knowledge (although I must add that Mrs. Lieberman's insights are often the more interesting ones). The narrative makes clear that these are real human beings with real children and parents and problems. When their lives are stirred into the soup of arguably our most chaotic Presidential campaign, a very interesting tale emerges.

The reviewer below - An.McCracken - is a fake. He reviews countless books each day but he does not read the books, just paraphrases other people's reviews. REPORT THIS TO AMAZON. Click on (Report this) link under the review, next to the voting buttons.

One cannot possibly read this book and not develop a greater appreciation for the sacrifices, courage, determination and faith that the Liebermans made throughout the campaign and throughout their lives.

Not only is this a "biography" but it is also an excellent book on the political process, namely the campaign process. Throughout the book, the reader becomes acutely aware of the amount of work, energy and choregraphing a national campaign requires.

In the last election, I did not know much about Joe Lieberman and that is because I did not give my self the opportunity to do so. When this book first came out, I scoffed at it, because it looked so "light" and yet after reading it I was taken aback, not only on what an interesting look it is into a presidential campaign, but also into the man himself.

Suffice it to say I agree with much of the man's politics, but that non-withstanding, this book was an interesting look at a family who lives their faith while working on the campain trail. It was touching as well as eye-opening.

In addition this book was able to tell its tale without totally stomping on the opposing party. It was obviously written by a man with good character and ethics. Perhaps it was released to coinside with his run for the presidency, but it has made me take a second look at this man and boy am I impressed!

It's a light, quick, fluff read. If you liked Gore/Lieberman in 2000 you'll like the book. Lieberman falls all over himself emphasizing his religion while feigning shock that it could be an issue. He also sidesteps any criticism from fellow Jews that his positions are decidedly unorthodox. He emphasizes that everywhere his wife ever went and everyone she ever spoke to always loved her. If something went wrong in the campaign, it was because he didn't follow through with his instincts. He even quoted an editorial where someone said that Lieberman can make an attack not feel like an attack. Hardball politico, but with a smile.

This book has changed the way I looked at the issues of development, modernisation & morals. An amazing read, beautifully written and with great insights.

I have just returned from a trip to Ladakh and I could really relate to what Ms.Norberg talks about in the book.

Just a couple of side issues. It'd be good to know what exactly went wrong in Ladakh. Here are a people who for 2000 years had lived successfully by the rules of Buddhism. How & why did Buddhism fail these people in the face of global/western economic & cultural imperialism? Does the blame lie with Buddhism- it being too 'compassionate' and allowing a religion? Does the blame lie with the Ladakhis who probably were not as sincere Buddhists as they are made out to be?

After all if they really were such devout Buddhists, how come they fell to the greed that capitalism breeds?

Anyway, these are issues which could have been addressed in the book. Regardless, the book is excellent! A must read.

How does life in a non-industrial society compare to life in our own? In which society are people happier? If life in non-industrial societies compares favorably to life in our own, then why are the barrios of the third world filling up with migrants from remote villages? This book provides surprising insights into these questions. It also provokes reflections on our own society and its influence on the rest of the world. After reading a used copy I picked up for free, I bought seven copies of this book for friends and family!

Rarely have I felt more dispair about the direction of what we know as civilization as I felt halfway through this book. The Ladakh people are described as happy, healthy, and self-reliant. Suddenly, the "real world" happens to them, and they come to see themselves as poor, when before they had no need of money.

The authors do a nice job of weaving a story of hope at the end but I have concern for the future of these people. It helps me understand the decision the government of Bhutan has made to isolate themselves from western-style civilization.

After reading this book, I suddenly realized the root problem of Western Civilization: We have no culture. Where there was once culture, we now have an expanding economic order threatening all life on the planet. Through its mechanism of growth and expansion, the global economy is conquering and converting life's diversity into an ecological and social monoculture of cash crops, Levis, soda pop and movie theatres. Perhaps moonscape would be a better word. Of course, it doesn't have to be this way. Our fast-paced, increasingly technological, capital-intensive, fossil fuel-centered, centralized, highly specialized, travel and commercial-oriented, often stressful society is by no means the end-all-be-all of human history. Murder, child abuse, drug abuse, theft, poverty, hunger, and every other problem that plagues the West are not products of human nature. The pathology of civilization is not natural or inevitable, and the Ladakhi are proof of this. Read this book and rediscover ancient, profound, life-affirmating alternatives to the modern humdrum. Discover another way of living, thinking and feeling. Important, necessary, engaging and masterfully written - this book was a treasure to read. Indeed, it was an awaking.

A MUST READ

The first half of *Ancient Futures* will delight and amaze you; the second half will break your heart.

In the 1970s, the Ladakhis of Little Tibet were a happy people. They had a sustainable traditional economy based on trade and cooperation - not money. One person's gain was not another person's loss. There was plenty of leisure, no hunger or poverty, very little sickness or disease, everyone was valued, there was no pollution and nothing was wasted. They got along fine with their Muslim neighbors and they kept their population stable through marriage customs based on land use. Almost every family had a celibate monk or nun. Buddhist monasteries and people had a mutually beneficial economic, social and spiritual relationship. Ladakhis are a naturally contemplative people with a great deal of spiritual awareness. "Schon chan" (one who angers easily) is about the only insult in the Ladakhi lnaguage. "Lack of pride is a virtue, for pride, born of ego, has nothing to do with self-respect among these Buddhist people." The author says that it took her two years of living among them to realize that the people were genuinely and joyfully HAPPY. Then the world beat a path to their door and all that changed - in fewer than two decades.

It's like a little piece of cultural time-lapse photography. What took western culture more than four centuries to do to the Native-Americans took only twenty years here. Ladakh has become a cautionary tale and a monument to western greed and stupidity.

Now there is poverty and unemployment, stress-related disease, women are devalued, the people are ashamed of their "backward" culture, there is little leisure but a great deal of pollution and waste as well as dispute between Muslims and Buddhists and the population had increased markedly. ("Interestingly, a number of Ladakhis have linked the rise of birth rates to the advent of modern democracy. "Power is a question of votes" is a current slogan, meaning that, in the modern sector, the larger your group, the greater your access to power. Competition for jobs and political representation within the new centralized structures is increasingly dividing Ladakhis.")

Chiildren are trained to become specialists in a technological rather than an ecological society. They no longer have time to learn the superb survival techniques of their families. Western culture is creating artificial scarsity and inducing competition.

Now I understand the mechanism better. A culture that has a heavily subsidized infrastructure invades a traditional self-sustaining culture and creates artificial "needs." So they go to the city to earn money which they never needed before, leaving their farms and women, who are immediately devalued because they're not wage earners. The people are no longer planting, irrigating, spinning wool, gathering seeds, harvesting, playing music and singing and telling stories, having seasonal parties, marriage parties or funeral watches - together.

Time has become a commodity. It has become uneconomical to grow one's own food, make one's own clothes and build one's own house. You have to pay your neighbors for the work that the whole community used to do for free.

The men are in the cities earning money and the women are producing tourist commodities with the wool they used to spin for their own use and the food they used to grow for their own families. Now they grow cash crops for strangers so they can make enough money to buy polyester clothes and walkmans and jeans for their kids and food grown hundreds of miles away and fuel trucked in from afar.

The Yak and the Dzo, uniquely suited for high altitudes of Ladakh gave rich milk but not as much as western cattle. So what did the conquering culture do? They imported cattle that can't make it at such altitudes, so more land has to be relegated to planting crops to feed the cattle, thereby upsetting the balance. And they call this progress.

Why can't we just leave people alone - especially when they're doing FINE without us?

"When one-third of the world's population consumes two-thirds of the world's resources," says Norberg-Hodge, "and then in effect turns around and tells the others to do as they do, it is little short of a hoax. Development is all too often a euphemism for exploitation, a new colonialism."

All this would be a dismal tragedy comparable to Columbus's complete genocide of the Tainos if not for a "counter development" movement generated in part by this author. Since the Ladakhis can't go back, they can at least go forward. Instead of importing expensive fossil fuels (previously they had used yak dung and kept warm) they can have solar houses and greenhouses, which have worked very well and given them one benefit that they have previously not had. That's something. Information is another plus. The people are being made aware that westerners pay more for whole grains, organic vegetables, pure water, natural fibers, and natural building materials - things these people have had for a thousand years without money. This is something so-called third-world people are generally not told about.

Once in a while a book comes along that changes one's perspective forever. *Ancient Futures* is such a book. I haven't been the same since.

One of the reviewers on this site said he ended up buy copies for his friends. So have I. This book is a must-read for every person who is concerned about the preservation of our planet and our species.

pamhan99@aol.com

If 10 stars were available, that's what I would rate this book. The history of how we got into our current mess and what Progressives can do NOW to turn it around is communicated clearly, rationally, and passionately while remaining a highly interesting read. Having read dozens and dozens of related books over the past 3 or 4 years, this one may well be the most effective call to action of all. I was so motivated and inspired by it that I bought 12 more copies to send to friends and relatives. Don't even consider skipping this one...it's a Must Read treasure!

Ever wonder how Republicans manage to capture middle and working class votes while serving the interests of the wealthy? How they've managed to win the presidency and both houses of Congress despite disastrous economic, environmental and international policies? What it is about their communication style that makes it so convincing and effective?

Wonder no more. Paul Waldman has studied the masters and returned with a brilliant and entertaining analysis of their technique, along with a strategic plan for beating them at their own game.

This book is genius--great fun to read and filled with aha! moments. If you'd like a manual in the martial arts of political communication so that you can help progressives become winners, then this is a must-read.

I bought this book together with "The Good Fight" by Peter Beinart. While both books have their utility, neither is as good as Joe Klein in "Politics Lost." Waldman gets five stars to Beinart's four mostly because he is much more readable, has many useful tables including an analysis of the states where extremist Republicans as well as extremist Democrats are weak, and his book is generally focused on the left of center middle and the caring citizen as opposed to policy wonks that Beinart addresses in his book.

Page 111 is a very fine diagram of the issue columns that the Democratic Party simply does not address responsibly nor--a theme throughout the book--courageously. Over-all the book does a very fine job of defining the distinctions between conservatives and progressives, as well as the distinctions between what conservatives stand for and what they say, and what progressives stand for and do not say.

The author spends most of his time comparing conservatives to progressives (code for left of center liberals) which is something of a pity because he appears to have a very well developed sense of the issues and what the center and left-center can and should stand for.

There are two bottom lines in this book, and both of them make eminent sense to me:

1) Don't bring a knife to a gun-fight. The author points out in detail how inept and weak and unfocused the Democrats are at every stage of the political game beginning with high school and collage political clubs.

2) Stand for the public, for the individual taxpayer, for the blue-collar worker, the working poor, the lower middle class. The author stresses that this is a fight between those who respresent special interests and believe the government role is to liberate the marketplace (code for allow the looting of the Commonwealth) and those who should be representing the masses of individual workers and taxpayers.

The author takes a long view and believes that it will take a great deal of time to recover from the total abdication to the extremist Republicans. While this nice in principle, the book does not focus as well on what it will take to win over-whelmingly; for that we recommend Joe Klein's "Politics Lost." On the issues, Matthew Miller's "The Two-Percent Solution."

On a personal note, I would add that the author's focus on "Being Right is Not Enough" is perfectly consistent with my own view that "Vote Democratic Is Not Enough." Rove and Cheney have demonstrated, twice, that they can steal Presidential elections that are close--through Florida in 2000, through Ohio is 2004. Even if every liberal-progressive adopted the ideas in this book, they would not be enough. We need a multi-party focus on electoral reform and crushing the extremist Republican thieves (I am a moderate Republican), crushing the special interests, and restoring the Republic to the public---a Republic of, by, and for the People, not Corporations.

With wit and intelligence, Paul Waldman makes a compelling case for a progressive vision. While he examines and learns from conservative successes, what he is most interested in is what will energize a progressive movement. He admirably stresses the importance of a progressive agenda, as well as a narrative for progressives. He looks at the importance of both the short and the long term, and why progressives must have both. He is also very skilled at performing a kind of ideological ju-jitsu, in which he turns apparent Republican strengths into weakenesses that can be effectively utilized by progressives who that are both wiley and principled. On a couple of instances of this I am not wholly convinced, but I would nevertheless highly recommend this book to all progressives.

In 2004 a President who lied to justify an unpopular war and had the worst jobs record since the Depression still managed to win. The Republicans control all three branches of government and a majority of governorships and state legislatures. The national debate has shifted from real problems to distractions like gay marriage, partial-birth abortion, and flag-burning. Waldman believes this all adds up to a need for progressives to change.

Waldman believes progressives should create a single movement (not remain a collection of interest groups) devoted to fighting conservatism and advancing a progressive view. Ask an ordinary person what conservatives stand for and he'll likely respond with four powerful, easily understood ideas - low taxes, small government, strong defense, and traditional values. Ask him what liberals stand for and chances are he'll give you the obverse. Conservatives focus on emotions and the character of the speaker; liberals on logic and facts. (A good point - look at most advertising in the U.S.!)

A majority of Americans favor legal abortion, gun control universal healthcare, strong environmental protections, generous Social Security and Medicare benefits. Yet, they are stymied. Part of conservatives' secret is their institutions (eg. American Enterprise Institute, Heritage Foundation, Hoover Institute) are multi-issue and make political use of their products easy (eg. recording studios are available for interviews). Liberals, on the other hand, have single-issue organizations, poorly marketed publications, and poorly paid core staff.

Waldman points out that the South (heavy evangelical concentration) is a major problem for progressives; the problem is acerbated by Republicans use of racism (Reagan - welfare queens, Bush I - Willie Horton, Bush II - going to Bob Jones University with its ban on inter-racial dating, and avoiding a position on the Confederate Flag). Suggests progressives point out Dobson et al don't follow their own teaching regarding the poor, the GOP is guardian of widely unpopular status quo on healthcare (would help business as well), refocusing the abortion debate to "How can we reduce it?" and pointing out it went down under Clinton and up under Bush, support doing away with the Electoral College in the interest of fairness, and attack the notion of "liberal elite" via the GOP's tax cuts for the rich and its healthcare positions. Also suggests not letting Republican attacks go unanswered - eg. Kerry vs. Swift boat ads.

Defining Progressives: "We're all in this together," vs. Conservatives' "We're all on our own and out for ourselves."

Good material.

As a relative newcomer to the field of historical criticism, I appreciate Provan/Long/Longman's work. It is truly a sign of good scholarship to be able to take the complex and make it understandable. I don't mean easy, but understandable. Provan's command of his topic is clear and thorough, especially in regard to epistemology and testimony. Those who by faith and reason trust the Biblical texts as reliable testimonies of ancient Israel will find encouragement in this book.

Having only recently dived into the pool of historiography, this book has helped me tremendously to understand the complexities that go into a historiographer's reconstruction of history.

As to why this book is leaps and bounds better than most of your popular apologetic works, here are a few differentiating factors:

A. Philosophy of historigraphical reconstruction. This is perhaps the most unique feature of the book. Before even diving into the various evidences being considered for a reconstruction of the history of Israel, the authors spend roughly 100 pages in dealing with the philosophical underpinnings of historiography. I found this section IMMENSELY enlightening and the book is worth the price for this exposition alone. On what grounds do we accept or reject historical testimony? Does the presence of ideology in a text imply that historical details have been interpolated? What can archaeological evidence tell us about the past? What are the limitations of science in reconstructing history? These and more questions are dealt with in "History of Israel". Rather than merely beginning with a given set of assumptions, the authors dissect the assumptions of themselves and their counterparts in Israeli historical reconstruction.

B. Expertise in the field of historiography. Unlike the many Josh McDowells and Lee Strobels, the authors of this book are professionals in this field of study and it shows in their knowledge of the material at hand, as well as their treatment of the material.

C. Objectivity in a reconstruction of Israel's past. What I loved about this book, especially in comparison to other books on the trustworthiness of the Old Testament texts, was the cool-headed, objective handling of the evidence. The word "prove" is rarely, if ever used. The authors' make it clear that nothing in history is "proven"; only plausible and implausible. This is a breath of fresh air in comparison to the oftentimes dogmatic assertions that are made by many other Christian authors who propound their conclusions with a matter-of-fact, case-closed confidence that leaves many, like myself, wondering what side of the story I'm not hearing from dissenters. The author of "History of Israel" provide ample examples (although sometimes too brief, but there is only so much room when dealing with an topic of this magnitude) of those who do not believe in the historicity of the Biblical texts. Mud-slinging and demonization of dissenters is not present in any of the book. Dissenting views are given what I considered to be a fair (but perhaps too brie) treatment.

"History of Israel" does not set out to prove the Old Testament reliable. It attempts to demonstrate how the Biblical texts can, and likely do, fit in with the evidence at hand. Can this be proven? No. But they certainly make a compelling case for why we ought to trust the traditions handed down to us.

This came highly recommended in our introductory Old Testament course, and with good reason. It is excellent at describing and assessing critical challenges to the Biblical history of Israel: the academy has got to the point where one can write that no-one seriously believes that Israel existed as a nation that entered Palestine. Great book for sifting through what is in the academy and assessing the evidence.

The authors are to be congratulated for their beautifully laid out and tightly argued book. The first third of the book lays out their philosophical basis for the history and provokes many questions and encourages much thought. We are in their debt for this fine, fine book on Israel's history as its comes to us from the "testimony" of Scripture. The authors are to be appreciated for their answering the so called "minimalists"
approach to "biblical" history. I found the book well written, wonderfully argued, and extremely helpful. This book should belong on the shelf of everyone interested in ancient Israel's history.

I have always felt that you should believe someone unless you have good reason not too. Many biblical minimalist seem to take the view that the bible is wrong as history with very little, if any proof to back their claims up.

This book is a ultra maximalist defense of the bible as a historical work. If you are interested in this subject, its a must read.

somebody told it like it is...The judicial system is not balanced and it never will be. Thanks judge for telling the truth!

As a New Yorker, I remember Judge Bruce Wright well. He was dubbed: "Cut 'em loose Bruce", because he often released arrested citizens without their having to post bail money. Mr. Wright upheld the law that bail is not to be used as a punishment, but only as a guarantee that the accused party return to court to face the charges against he/she. This infuriated the "powers-that-be". The fact that Judge Wright is a Black man, and many of those who came before him were also Black people, swayed the media to portray his actions as racially motivated, as opposed to his acknowledgement of the law. His book superbly reflects the blatant inequitableness of the criminal justice system and how it is purposely designed to work against Blacks and other people of color. His personal experiences, as a sitting judge, lend great credence to his analogy and conclusions concerning the legal system. Wright fearlessly gives names and elaborates on instances wherein he witnessed and experienced bias in the system. This book is not written in "textbook" fashion, provides some humorous irony and is very informative. Add it to your library.

I'm still reading this book. First time reading a book like this.This is one of the greatest. I recommend this book to be added to your library. It's gives truthful information of the legal system concerning the racism of blacks in the court system.

This book is an eye opener. It give you the truth behind the justice system from the perpective of a Sumpreme Court Judge who exposed the racism in the court system in New York. I never heard of Bruce Wright and happen I purchased this book. I have a lot of respect for the author.

somebody told it like it is...The judicial system is not balanced and it never will be. Thanks judge for telling the truth!

In the late nineteenth century and early twentieth, Williamson County, Illinois became a byword for lawlessness. The county first came to nationwide attention in the 1870s, when a bloody feud, comparable to the worst that the mountains of Kentucky and Tennessee had to offer, wracked the area. Then in the 1920s, the town was beset by union and Ku Klux Klan violence to a shocking degree. Indeed, the rest of the country, and even the rest of the world was appalled at the violence, and the townspeople who condoned it.

This is a wonderfully interesting book. The author does an excellent job of bringing bloody Williamson to life, and showing it in all its lack of glory. This tale of union murderers and KKK hoodlums (often the same people) is sure to shock you, and make you very glad that you didn't live then and there!

I highly recommend this book!

I was amazed when reading the review by Alan Mills. How could someone get the most basic facts presented in the book so wrong? It's mind-boggling! He claims that the mine owner hired thugs who killed the miners when, in fact, the mine owner hired guards and non-union miners to work the mines and the union miners killed them. And the "thugs" did not hang around because they were dead! Also, Williamson is a county not a town. If you are a history buff, you will enjoy this book but Alan Mills' review has absolutely nothing to do with the book. Another reviewer guessed that Alan had just read the back cover but he couldn't have even done that based on his "review."

This is a true gem, which depicts the violent history of a rural southern county in Illinois. The author tells of organized labor, bootleggers, gangs and the KKK of the 1920s in Williamson County, Illinois. Angle writes in any easy format for most readers and his book is well indexed. I would highly recommend this book to all readers!

Mike Koch, author of "The Kimes Gang."

While working near Marion, Illinois (Williamson County) in the winter of 2002 and spring of 2003 I was (at first) completely unaware of the history of the area. Finding that I was a history lover, a co-worker, native to the area, told me about "the troubles" and recommended this book. I quickly decided that Bloody Williamson was one of the better books I had ever read concerning this violent era in American history. While reading the book, I rode over many of the roads and visited as many of the old sites as I could find.

Williamsburg County had an unbelievable amount of violence, in both variety and magnitude, in such a short period of time. In less than fifty years this one county had labor wars, Ku Klux Klan wars, gang wars, and one of the worst feuds in American history. Paul Angle is a good writer, but that is only an added benefit. Reading the media accounts of these events would be fascinating enough. Anyone interested in a case study of a dysfunctional community should read this book.