Bush Books

My favorite book from Nora Roberts! She details so well what its like to live in Alaska, you feel like you're there. Great book!

I have read many of her books.She is my favorite author.She can write on any subject.I have read all her J.D.ROBB books I lived in ALASKA so I reall enjoyed it. Irene

Every time I put it down, I couldn't wait to get back to the book. Loved the Alaska setting. Great characters, good mystery..what more can you ask for?

I'm kind of leary of Nora Roberts, simply because I don't like her "occult" type books...the ones that involve spirits and like-things.
I got this book on a whim...and I got the audio book on CD. May I tell you, I was hooked from the FIRST disc!

This is a long book (there were 13 CDs), but worth it all...you're NEVER bored with it, by any stretch of the imagination! I have a long drive to work and back, so I could do a CD or so a day...and it made my trip feel like nothing, as I was so into that book. I was so hooked, as a matter of fact, I'd find myself thinking about it during the day, then again once I got home. I was tempted to go get it and bring it inside to listen to it when I was home...but then I knew that would be one less day left to listen to it on that long drive! I nearly fell all over myself trying to get to the car the next morning, though .

This book is set in a town of Lunacy, Alaska. The town grown and so much that they felt a need to hire a police chief for their small 2-man force (not counting Peach). Ignatius "Nate" Burke was their choice...and what he found was a was the proverbial "bag of worms": a secret had been hidden for years in a cave on a moutain. A secret that Chief Burke can't ignore as he finds himself in the middle of not one, but two murders-one 18 old, and another tied to the first one by a suicide during the first part of his tenure in Lunacy.

This book is not only an adventure in the icy North, but a love story, too. Can't leave that out! Nate and Lunacy's VERY independent bush pilot, Megan (Meg) Galloway, are the story's love interest...and they leave a trail of sparks from their first meeting!

The way I see it is if it's so good you think about it when you're not reading it, then, it's a great book! When you can't wait to hear (or read) another chapter, it's a great book! Hats off to you, Nora...this one was one of your greatest!

All I can say in the way of recommendation is: GET THIS BOOK...it's certainly worth it (and then some)!

I adore Nora Roberts. Her male characters have always been so appealing, and her plots have always hooked me. Not so with her book Northern Lights. I'm so sorry to leave only two stars (I would give Nora herself 10 stars if I could!) but this was borderline unreadable for me. Her male lead, Nate Burke, is not as likeable as Nora's other heros have been. Her female lead, Meg Galloway, is tougher than titanium and viciously independent, just like all her other female leads, except that Meg is also unnecessarily vulgar. As if to prove that she's as testosterone-filled as any man, she throws the "F" bomb around and talks about sex every single chance she gets. There is no respite from it. The reader knows Meg is going to get crude as soon as she and Nate are together. It is constant, and it does NOT add to the story. Toward the end, when Nate gives Meg something, she acts extremely cute, but inevitably suggests some baudy sex. Other interesting characters, like Jacob, are not given the attention they deserve. The plot is a bit of a stretch. A couple of suspects say it best when they suggest that the killer should have just shot his/her victim and hidden the body where it would never be found in the vast Alaskan wilds. Would a killer really set up time-consuming, elaborate traps that might or might not work? Especially when said killer has a gun at his/her disposal? If you have never read Nora Roberts, do not start with this book. Maybe start with Homeport. Her male lead in that one is positively dreamy, and the girl's not so hard-edged that you can't like her.

Though the title suggests the book is about the Bush era, it also covers US history back to end of the 19th century. In many respects it is a Manifesto of the author. The arguments are well backed by facts, and a very interessting read even if you don't agree.

George W. has gone wild, in the process, he nearly destroyed the American right. This fact cannot be debated by anyone anymore. Bush took the legacy given to him by the republican revolution of '94 and the Reagan legacy and flushed it away. He demanded executive powers to fight the war on terror. To get these powers, Dubya had to initiate many new social programs. Through these means, Bush expanded the scope of government, and paid little attention to the conservative policy alternatives that existed within the think tanks of DC. The consequence for the right is that the movement has been undercut. The legitimacy of any conservative policies is no in question because Dubya weakened them. Pat does a good job of explaining this in very clear detail, all with the sense of humor he always displayed. Buchanan is not an anti-Semite; rather he is a throwback to an isolationist age. Consequently, his views seem a little unfamiliar to many. However, they are not evil and not based on any ignorance.

This book's last pages were written before the general election of 2004. Consider this when you consider our country's current economic situation. Yes, recessions are cyclical; but the recession of 2008 will hit American employees (whoops, the recently unemployed) with more and longer layoffs than anything we've seen in the last 30 years. Why? Read chapter six, Economic Treason. Can't make you read it? Then answer these two questions (by the way, I don't know the answers). What is America selling to the rest of the world that funds our wealth? What other than some mighty tasty burgers and cup of Joe's are we actually making here that we are buying? It seems that the rest of the stuff we buy is not Made in the U.S.A. As for the rest of the book, two observations: 1) Buchanan appears a bit harsh towards Israel, and 2) it appears that the Tabula is winning.

I picked this book up at the local Dollar store. At that price I thought "what the heck I might as well give it a read". It turned out to be a fairly good book. I've always had my areas of disagreement with Buchanan but I give him credit for having the courage to stand against the Israel Lobby, our current foreign policy insanity , and some of the modern subversions of the term "conservative". This certainly hasn't helped his popularity among his fellow Republicans though.

This book makes some excellent points regarding terrorism, the nature of Islam, and the dangers of playing globo-cop. I give this book a qualified recommendation and with such a low price (used) it would definitely be worth picking up a copy.

"Since the Cold War's end, however, all the blunders of Britain's ruling class in its march to folly have been replicated by our elites, from the arrogance of power to the alienation of allies to the waging of imperial wars where no vital U.S. interests are at risk. Spurning the counsel of John Quincy Adams, America now goes abroad in search of monsters to destroy." - Page 5

The author delves deeply into the negative changes in both the USA & the Republican party brought about by the neo-cons. He spends the first third of the book ridiculing the present Bush administration willing attitude toward waging war to spread democracy. With the bulk focusing on the Iraq war.

He shows how Richard Pearle & Paul Wolfiwitz convinced president G.Bush to adopt interventionist policies. In ch-3, he gives some historical background on Islam. from their early conflicts with the west to the present. In ch-4, he speaks of the vagueness of the term "war on terror." He feels it is an eternal war that can't truly be won. Chapter-5 was the most fascinating to this reader as he compares the USA's economic & military power to that of China's. In ch-6-8, he bashes the abysmal economic policies of the neo-cons. From out of control government spending, the huge deficits, the outsourcing of our manufacturing base, & the de-valuing of the dollar. If something is not done to reverse these trends he feels we will be in a permanent decline. In ch-9, he detests the craven Congress' surrender to the judicial branch. He feels the latter has become far to powerful in its negative influence on our citizenry.

In ch-10, "The Way Back Home" he concludes with advice on foreign policy, economic policy, immigration, Islam & terror. For both the USA & the Republican party he believes itis crucial that the traditionalist conservative ideological base take back the party from the neo-con wing of the party. Unlike his previous book "Death Of The West," he has plenty of statistics to back up his claims. In conclusion he feels it will take at least a decade to repair the damage done by the Bush administration. Lets
all hope it can be fixed faster than that?

Sammon does a great job of holding your interest. I read 'Strategery' and loved it. I just finished, 'Misunderestimated', and found it every bit as captivating as 'Strategery'. Both books written by Sammon about the Bush administration.

I think we are living in one of the greatest moments in US history. The Bush administration fully understands this from the top down. Condi Rice is an incredible person who plays a key role in both books.

People should read these books just to see how the Bush administration plays the left wing news media for the shallow imbeciles that they are.

In the chapter titled, 'Whining Pool', a reporter asked Bush if he was concerned about what the media writes about him. Bush matter-of-factly responded, "People don't make up their mind based upon what you write."

I know that's true for me. It felt great to read that Bush feels the same way and isn't afraid to say it out loud.

Read this book with some trepidation. Since the press tries to hold the ground on what they want the public to percieve of any given person, this was a refreshing read. Really shows how President Bush sticks to his principles and morals, despite the constant slamming of the media. His true power comes out in this book and how he has been able to fool over and over his detractors.
It's a great read regardless of your party. Could be a window into how power really works when you stick to your plan.

As an European, I should have read a book like this before. Mass medias around the world are pleased to say bad things about President Bush without giving him the real credit he deserves.
President Bush is already one of the greatest president of the US history. His support of democracy in the Middle East and his fight against terror will protect us, Europeans and Americans as well, from the new totalitarism. The light of Reagan's legacy survives in Bush. Bill Sammon makes his work by counter-attacking the lefties Bush-haters. What Simmons shows is simply the real President Bush, his way of thinking, of reasoning, his view of the future. Anyone who really needs to understand his President - or the President of USA if you are foreigner - should read this book.
Bush is making history and winning WWIV, it is time to realize that for many people around the world.

Bill Sammon, Senior White House Correspondent for the Washington Times and political analyst for the Fox News Channel, recounts the events that occurred while he followed George W. Bush through his first term and into his second. Given the context of the book, Sammon's journalism wavers between unapologetic partisanship and a guise of objective journalism. Sammon relates to the reader through real events but adds commentary and narration with dramatic effect, and while his sources are not meticulously noted, he cites dates and publications sporadically. Many citations are from the Washington Times.

In some of Sammon's narrated dialogue one might wonder whether Sammon actually heard every word he quotes or if some of the narration is included for the sake of drama. For instance, the first Chapter, "Rise of the Bush Haters", tells the story of Bush's trip on August 22, 2002, to Portland, Oregon, for the purpose of attending a fundraiser for Oregon senator Gordon Smith. Bush's visit incited organized rioting from many of the Portland residents, and those who lined the streets to jeer at the President bravely ignored demands from local law enforcement and Secret Service personnel to stay back and/or disband. By Sammon's account, these protestors were viciously inhuman to not just the fundraiser attendees, but to anyone entering the Hilton where the fundraiser was held regardless of their political affiliation. Sammon describes a situation met by Donald Tykeson, an attendee of the fundraiser and a man diagnosed with multiple sclerosis, where a protestor blocked the man's motorized wheelchair as he tried to make his way into the Hilton's entrance. Sammon details the conversation between the protestor and Tykeson, but never indicates whether he was actually there or if he heard about the incident second-hand. Perhaps Sammon neglects this detail because it would take away from the feeling of the moment, as it is this feeling that Sammon wants to convey to the reader. Appealing to the reader's emotion is perhaps Sammon's best trick in this purported non-fiction publication, and therefore it is sometimes difficult to dig deeper into the facts, rather than getting lost in the descriptive (or possibly deceptive?) narrative.

Sammon then steps away from dramatic reporting and offers a textbook summary of Saddam Hussein's reign as Iraqi dictator, though even in this case sources are few and far between. The entire second chapter is an in depth history of Saddam Hussein's rise to his eventual position as dictator of all Iraq. Sammon recalls events in history where Saddam ordered executions and assassinations, though here too he gets carried away in the emotion of the story and leaves citations scattered about the text for which the diligent reader must scramble to find. Perhaps Sammon is certain that any red-blooded American reader is already sold on the tales of Saddam's bloody reign, and therefore he sees no need to waste effort on validating the credibility of his sources for the reader. Sammon's book would be an unlikely candidate for a primary source in a formal research paper, and his lack of meticulous citation is his quiet acknowledgement of this fact. Through this descriptive history of the Iraqi dictator in the second chapter, Sammon outlines the reasons for the escalation of the Iran-Iraq war and the eventual Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. After the continued refusal of Iraqi officials to cooperate with U.N. inspectors and U.S. diplomats, Sammon states that "Saddam's emasculation of the Clinton Administration was complete." It is moments like these when Sammon's partisanship comes forward to remind the reader this is not a text to be used in a history class; it is instead a publication of the opinions and facts gathered by one man with a decidedly conservative view of American politics.

Chapter 3, "A Milestone and a Mission", begins a year after September 11, 2001, at the site where Flight 93 crashed in rural Pennsylvania. Sammon provides adequate description of the surrounding field, the mood of the audience, and Bush's speech to the people. Then, Sammon jumps to Bush's speech at the ruins of the World Trade Center which occurred later that day. The inclusion of the speech is appropriate, as it reminds the reader about events that have clearly defined the agenda of the Bush Administration through its first and second terms. Sammon recounts the events that led to sources of conflict between the U.N. and the United States concerning Iraq, including Bush's eventual declaration to the U.N. that "...(T)he Security Council resolutions will be enforced, the just demands of peace and security will be met - or action will be unavoidable. ...(A)nd a regime that has lost its legitimacy will also lose its power." By late summer of 2002 it had become clear that the intention of the U.S. was to go to war with Iraq, though no official statements had yet been made. Sammon uses this chapter to build up to the events that eventually led to Operation Iraqi Freedom.

At this point, Sammon has laid the groundwork for the meat of his story. The public attitude concerning the Bush administration has been established, the history leading to the current conflict in Iraq has been outlined, and the stance of the President has finally become clear. Up to this point, the book has maintained a delicate balance between opinion and fact through a thin veil of objectivity. Chapter 4, "Midterm Meltdown", upsets this balance somewhat as Sammon grumbles through the details concerning the 2002 Minnesota election between Coleman (R) and Wellstone (D). Things turned for the worst when Wellstone was killed in a plane crash. The results of the election would mean the difference between a Republican or Democrat majority in the senate, which is why the election received elevated publicity prior to the death of Wellstone. What started as a memorial gathering for Wellstone mutated into a poorly disguised Democratic rally. By Sammon's account, the Democratic Party used Wellstone's death to unfairly solicit viewers of broadcast television. Sammon concludes that this event damaged the credibility of the Democrats, and that Bush's political savvy and resulting campaign swung the election toward Coleman (the eventual winner), thus embarrassing Democrats and "the liberal media". While Sammon says that Bush did not gloat, Sammon does it for him. Even after outlining the importance of the global issues at hand, Sammon falls in to the same habits for which he criticizes the Democrats; he celebrates a victory for Republicans at all governmental levels, and his satisfaction with this accomplishment oozes from the book like oil from a broken gasket. Sammon is warming to his own theme by the end of this chapter, and therefore any remaining objectivity is certainly gone.

By the way, Sammon likes the phrase "warming to his theme". He uses it a lot.

Chapter 5, "The No-Gloat Zone", continues to warm to the theme, and Sammon gets a chance to gloat about his buddy-buddy relationship with George Bush and how, through his own body language during press conferences, he notifies the President that he has a question. The reader even learns here that the President has a nickname for the author: "Superstretch." Whenever Sammon writes about his relationship with the President, he adopts a humble, admiring posture, as if he yearns to gain approval from the man.
Sammon recalls Helen Thomas' prying questions about Bush's plan for Iraq during the November 7, 20002 press conference following the midterm elections. Sammon has an obvious distaste for Thomas, and he gladly illustrates through his own transcript of the press conference that Bush easily silenced Thomas with firm answers concerning his policies toward Iraq and North Korea. Here, like many places through the book, one can see small, seemingly irrelevant discrepancies with Sammon's translation of Bush's public statements. If one simply goes to the Whitehouse.gov website and looks for press conferences, the transcripts are all there. A comparison of the Sammon transcript with the White House transcript reveals minor - though notable - differences. While this could be considered a minor quibble, it is interesting to see that Sammon takes editorial liberties when quoting the President, eliminating many of his redundant statements, his verbal stumbling, and the way that he often constructs sentences in staccato packets of English words. Sammon never removes or changes the general meaning of Bush's statements, but in Sammon's world, President Bush speaks succinctly and without a stumble, almost as if everything he says is very clear.

In this chapter, Sammon even reveals that Condoleezza Rice told him that the administration had originally drafted three different resolutions concerning the Iraq problem for the UN; one on terrorism, one on human rights, and one on weapons of mass destruction. The decision to justify the Iraq war with the WMD argument, according to Sammon's conversation with Rice, was chosen because "...'the WMD was what people considered most pressing.'" What materialized was resolution 1441, which held Saddam in "material breach" of resolutions that had been passed before. Sammon goes on to explain conversations he had with Colin Powell that reveal how 1441 was written specifically to find Hussein in breach of U.N. sanctions, such that the final result would be his guilt. Sammon quotes Powell: "We built a lot of ambushes or traps into 1441 for Saddam Hussein... (T)he big one was the initial one, where we said, you're in material breach now. That took a couple of weeks to get that in there." Sammon ends the chapter with a quote from our President: "I don't spend a lot of time taking polls around the world to tell me what I think is the right way to act. I've just got to know how I feel. I feel strongly about freedom. I feel strongly about liberty. And I feel strongly about the obligation to make the world a more peaceful place. And I take those responsibilities really seriously."

Chapter 6, "Whining Pool", is Sammon's account of a trip to Bush's ranch with a select few of the press corps. Again, when writing about the President, Sammon assumes a humble writing style in stark contrast to his typically haughty prose. Sammon portrays Bush as a confident, athletic, well-spoken man who takes pride in hard work. Bush shows the reporters the land surrounding his ranch in Texas, explains some of its geology, and even invites the reporters into his house for refreshments. Sammon describes George and Laura Bush's *4000* square foot home as "... a modest affair, almost unnoticeable amid the live oak trees." This chapter comes closest to revealing any charisma that the President may have, which is undoubtedly Sammon's goal.

Chapter 7, "Hosed by the State of the Union!", provides more background for Colin Powell's increasingly tense deliberations with members of the U.N. concerning the upcoming conflict with Iraq. According to Condoleezza Rice, "There was a thought at one time that it would be one day of WMD, one day of terrorism, one day of [human rights abuses]." Instead, the case made to the U.N. hinged primarily on the WMD factor, with notable mention of the other issues at hand. Sammon takes his chance to jibe at the Democrats he doesn't like (all of them), including John Kerry. He criticizes Kerry for wavering on the Authorization for use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002, a fact that came up repeatedly in Kerry's presidential campaign. And then Sammon applies generalist criticism to Germany, France, and Russia for their growing resistance to the war resolution, connecting France's contracts to build a nuclear power infrastructure in Iraq to their opposition to an American invasion. Sammon even throws this in: "Ever since the Cold War, Paris had grown increasingly resentful of America's status as the world's sole superpower." Colin Powell was resistant, as well, as Sammon admits "...much of the evidence against Saddam did not meet Powell's standards for an airtight case." Through candid conversations with Sammon, Powell admits his fears, worries, and concerns about the talks with the U.N.

At the end of the chapter, Sammon declares that Powell had his turn to "electrify the world," and that his presentation "... painted a terrifying picture of Saddam's deadly arsenal." As one may recall, when Powell defended Operation Iraqi Freedom to the UN, the speech was accompanied by audio recordings and a PowerPoint presentation with excerpts from these recordings. In addition, satellite photos and computer-generated images of mobile weapons vehicles were used to illustrate Powell's point. While Sammon may think Powell "... painted a terrifying picture", the U.N. did not unanimously agree that the evidence was substantial enough to justify the invasion of Iraq.

Sammon also uses the phrase "electrify the world" a lot, too.

Sammon devotes all of chapter 8, "The Get", to a dramatic transcript of Dan Rather's interview with Saddam Hussein. In the second chapter, Sammon criticized George Galloway for his adulating questions during an interview with Hussein, and in this chapter, Sammon does the same, even when he admits that many of Rather's questions to Saddam were pointed and direct. It seems that Sammon is unhappy with anyone who achieves personal audience with Hussein. Or perhaps Sammon is just unhappy that the interviewer is Dan Rather, as Sammon despises any self proclaimed liberal on principle.

Sammon uses much of the rest of the book to illustrate how the press can distort the truth. He goes into depth about the loaded questions given to Donald Rumsfeld, Ari Fleischer, Colin Powell, Dick Cheney, and President Bush himself. In all cases, Sammon is disgusted with the way in which the press sensationalizes all things negative. Never really including himself as a member of the press, Sammon transcribes dialogue between the members of the Bush Administration and the Press Corps as if the politicians were the parents and the members of the press were the children. Sammon cites numerous conversations where Rumsfeld directly admonishes the press for slanted and inaccurate reporting. While the many members of the press were/are guilty of false reporting, Sammon never once criticizes Fox News or Sinclair, his own employer.

Perhaps one of Sammon's biggest complaints about the press is the constant attempt by self-proclaimed liberals to compare the operations in Iraq to Viet Nam. The comparison is truly inaccurate, no doubt, as the number of deaths in Viet Nam climbed to tens of thousands very quickly. Sammon criticizes the common use of the word "quagmire" used by the press to describe Operation Iraqi Freedom. From Sammon's perspective, the press is a bunch of mindless goons who obviously do not see the genius in the Bush administration.

Sammon is really impressed with President Bush. Bush can fly airplanes, as he proved during his flight to the USS Lincoln for his "Mission Accomplished" speech. Bush is in great shape for his age, and he is daring. Sammon was one of the lucky few who got to fly into Baghdad with Bush for Thanksgiving. As the story goes, Bush and a few members of the White House press corps were whisked away under the nose of the Secret Service, loaded onto Air Force One, and flown into the Iraqi capital to serve food to hungry American soldiers. Everyone was back within 48 hours. Sammon is tickled pink to admit that he was one of those lucky few.

Sammon wears his conservatism like a badge of honor, as if he is a minority trapped in a sea of oppressive liberal idealism, as if his voice is the only source of rationalism in a crazy world. His book is no doubt highly entertaining to read, full of interesting information (most of which should be researched and compared to other sources), and represents a rare opportunity to see a different side of modern history. However, do not forget that this book has its own brand of sensationalism, written by a tall man with a boyish admiration for the current President of the United Sates. Between Fox and CNN, Sammon and Dan Rather, one might be able to piece together a picture of actual events. In either case, one should research their sources!

The rating of the book will vary wildly, depending on which side of the fence the reviewer sits.

It seems that the only books that the Bush administration and the neocons read were "Brave New World", "1984" and Marvel Comics "Judge Dread". The results appear here as a garbled account for the innocent abroad and judging by its ratings it's hit its intended target audience of drones squarely between the knees. Toilet paper is cheaper and will provide hours of endless scatalogical entertainment instead for all "ye good ole boys".

Robert Cormier is one of the most renowned authors of young adult literature, yet this one falls short of his signature plot twists. The characters, convicted killer Eric Poole and the runaway teen who fantasizes about him, Lori Cranston, are realistic enough - especially in a society that has watched thousands of women lustfully throw themselves at murderer Scott Peterson. While this is a page-turner that will strike an emotional, obsessive chord with young adults, I believe they will be as disappointed as I was with the conclusion of this work. Cormier knew his audience better than this particular novel suggests and it cannot possibly compare with his others (I Am The Cheese; After The First Death).

If this is the first of Cormier's books that you've tried, please don't allow it to cloud your judgment of his writing. Give the aforementioned titles a try - they are definitely worth your time and guaranteed a re-read.

This is an entertainingly dark novel. Ends in a fairly predictable, anticlimactic way, but is still great to read. I agree with another reviewer that Cormier takes a seemignly "nice" word and turns it into something quite nasty. For lack of a better term, the use of the words "the tenderness" throughout the novel... Eric is looking for "the tenderness" is really quite "skeevy." These characters are either empty or pathetic. I had to keep reminding myself that there are really people like this out there. This novel will make you shudder and feel like you need a shower afterwards, but all in a good way.

I like most of Cormier's work, but this one was awful. The characters are dull, the plot is predictable... it lacks the twists and turns of Cormier's other books. I wouldn't even leave this one behind in the coffee shop because I didn't want anyone else to have to read it!

Eric Poole is eighteen years old and is being released from a juvenile prison. He's been in the prison for three years for the murder of his mother and stepfather. Most people believe his story--that he killed them because he was horribly abused. Police Lieutenant Jake Proctor does not believe this story. In fact, he suspects that Eric is a psychopath who is actually involved in the murders of two teenaged girls in addition to the murders of his mother and stepfather. Proctor is not happy Eric is being released.

Lori Cranston is a teenager with an alcoholic mother and an unstable home life. She tends to get fixated on guys, to see one and not be able to get him out of her mind until she kisses him. She is looking for someone to be kind to her.

When Lori sees on the TV news that Eric has been released from prison, she remembers a time years ago when she met him briefly and he was kind to her, and she becomes fixated on him. She needs to track him down, to kiss him and see if he will be the one to be kind to her.

When Lori does track down Eric, their lives become connected. Things may not work out the way Lori had hoped, though.

I enjoyed reading about these characters, although neither of them had an appealing personality. I absolutely loved the ending of the story; it was perfectly satisfying.

I am reading Tenderness for a class on young adult literature that has been challenged as being "too edgy" for young readers. I have not read any of Cormier's other titles, but. By the end of the very first page I was bored, anxious, and dissapointed. Tenderness should be challenged as a read for young adults, not because of it's "disturbing and adult" content, but because it was written by an 83 yr old man with no idea what was going on in the minds of Gen Y teenagers, using some of the most obvious and overused cliches of all time - Oedipal teenage killer with no remorse, young troubled daughter in need of attention (drunk "beautiful" mother, abusive father roles) who "doesn't mind it" when older men look at her and touch her, getting-too-old for this cop who works on cold cases, haunted by the spector of a killer he once let go, blah blah blah. It was so out-of touch with the youth culture and mindset, so droolingly juvenile in writing style that I could barely put it down. It was like a study in What Not To Do When Writing For Teens. It should be taught to aspiring writers as an example, but never offered to teens looking to find something to relate to in this cold, unforgiving world. So, so dissapointed.

As a novice in politics I would reccommend this product to anyone. It is written in a clear and concise manner and tells it like it is.

For all of us that are oblivious to what is happenning in this country, we need to get informed. QUICK. Cafferty tell's it like it is. A Must read for Everyone.

This book somewhat reminds me of the "Idiots guide to..." series, yet nowhere does JC treat you like an idiot. The book is a clear guide to the major issues in our gov't today and points out a number of questions that we all need to ask ourselves the next time we vote. All of the major issues and scadals are discussed here (well, all except the numerous NEW problems that have arisen since the book was published) and I feel that if someone cannot see the logic and honesty of Jack's writing then I'd wager you are someone who LIKES to turn a blind eye to the corruption in Washington. Or maybe you voted for Bush. Maybe both, lol.

This book is also an easy read; if you are someone who is put off by political writing, know this book isn't dull at all and JC doesn't try to talk down to anyone or put himself on a pedestal. I hope he continues with another volume; Lord knows there is enough to write about. I'd like a thick chapter on Karl Rove, actually. I am sure there is a lot of info there.

One last thing: JC is on the money when he speaks of Congressional term limits. Let's bring that back...pronto!

I know Jack as the angry man in the little box that pops occasionally during CNN's Situation Room where randomly appears and we get to see his temper flair. The book is no different. Jack is pissed off with our leadership and lets us know in 250 pages of venomous attacks. I must admit, I agree wholeheartedly with him on most (not all) of his rants and I have often thought the same angry thoughts over the past 7-8 years over "the decider's" despotic ways of running his (or our) country.

Jack explains how Bush's recklessness and poor decision stemmed from surrounding himself with his inner circle has alienation him more and more. He continues to rant how Bush's lack of leadership and post denial of not knowing the severity of what was going to hit New Orleans has embarrassed our country and allowed of loss of life and property. In this chapter he explains how one of the worst things about Bush is his inability to ever admit mistakes. The issue of immigration is brought up with a bit too much "red meat attack mode". Cafferty feels we should just throw them all out - now. He bitterly explains the illegal have now right protesting in our country (he is right). But I disagree on just throwing them all out. Who would replace them? They're very much ingrained in our economy. The complete lunacy if the Dubai port's deal pushed by Bush is brought to light. Jack only gets madder though with Bush's failed policies and wanton and Congress' do nothing attitude and the effect of national debt on our middle class. The chapter on Bush's secret successful attempts at trampling the constitution and Bill of Rights is beyond scary - it's amazing most people are not even aware of what has gone on with our rights under Bush's watch. The patriot act and the NSA's illegal acts boil is blood. On and on. A great eye opener (to those that have been closed)!

He doesn't fault the American people - after all we elected Bush - Twice. Citizens who voted for bush in 2004 IMO should have know better - the lack of intelligence, the embarrassing image, the "I answer to God" (not the people), the arrogance, the sneakiness - was all there prior to 2004. He doesn't fault the citizens for their who cares attitude and action to our current disaster that will worsen. This is the big flaw in this book - no blame is put on us - we (or the majority of us) put Bush where he is. We continue to vote these career politicians into office over and over again.

Jack is entertaining but vulgar. I appreciate though - he is a college drop out, from alcoholic parents and had a rough childhood. And the book is evidenced as being written by such. It's not verbose like Dobb's books, it not eloquent and rational like Greenwald's book. This is written by a roll-up-your-sleeve's middle class guy who is thoroughly pissed off by our government - and scared. Rightfully so.

I thought throughout the book that this boils down to a rant with no solutions. I dislike books of this nature, which carry on about the status quo and present a laundry list of complaints but no solution. It dawned on me - Cafferty did offer two solutions all through out the book - impeachment or perhaps war crime. I agree, this should have been implemented long ago. And this was the solution all along. This is a good eye opener for the citizens. I think it's fair to say, most of us feel exactly this way now.

Count how many of the 1 star reviews are left by people with east Asian names. Some of them admit they did not read the book. Some of them say they were offended by Jack Cafferty's "goon" comments, with respect to China's leaders.

Well, unless they are members of China's totalitarian regime, there is no reason to be offended. US leadership is full of goons too. The people who get offended are just being stupid.

This analysis of policies of George H.W. Bush and William J. (Bill) Clinton offers a cogent, critical, where necessary, analysis of these Presidents and their foreign policies. It also offers an analysis of the shortcomings of both men, in domestic, as well as foreign relations. It shows the strengths and weaknesses of Bush and Clinton.
Bush, the economy, which may have cost him the election. Clinton, foreign policy and a military diminished by cuts, to promote the domestic agenda, which, some might feel made us more vulnerable. It's well read and gives a fairly detailed analysis in a short space of time [refers to abridged audio cassette]. Worth listening to, and makes me wonder if Mr. Halberstam would write an analysis of the current Bush's policies [or perhaps, lack of policies, save to tick off (to put it politely) those who'd seek America's downfall, e.g., radical Islamists, North Korea, Iran, and others, what he'd make of it. Let's hope he does.

A solid explanation of what happened in the Balkan's vis-à-vis US foreign policy. When reading books on recent history or current events I try to take into account the author's political bias and maintain vigilance for hidden agendas. Mr. Hablerstam's book appears to be an even-handed treatment of the subject. Like many Americans, I struggled for understanding of the events in media accounts of the conflict. This book was written in an easily understandable and engaging style. It offers about as thorough an understanding of the Balkan crisis that can be accomplished in a single volume. I highly recommend this book.

David Halberstam delivers another masterpiece in his book on how the Balkan crisis came about. This book is very fair condemning Bush Sr, Clinotn and all of the generals including Colin Powell for their actions in this area. The United States dropped the ball in stabilizing this region leaving it to the European Union to debate about. Our unwillingness to commit troops has led to more than a decade of crisis and halberstam delivers the story in great detail. Highly recommend if you are just starting to learn about the crisis as it is a very fair and well written account.

As I finished this book, I couldn't help think how out of date it feels. Although Halberstam mentions terrorist threats on the very last page of the book; the African embassy bombings, the USS Cole attack, the Khobar towers bombing, and President Clinton and Sandy Berger's chase after Al Queda appear nowhere. Honestly, most of the other large-scale foreign policy incidents of the 1990s (Somalia, Haiti, Iraq) take a back seat to the Bosnian and Kosovar conflicts in the former Yugoslavia. This book's subtitle could aptly be "The Vietman War and its impact on the American foreign policy response to the break-up of Yugoslavia."

Nevertheless, War in a Time of Peace is a very good read. Although it could be editted a little better (there are many repititive bits and some sloppy portions of narrative), Halberstam's familiar prose style keeps things moving. It is clear that many of the key players were interviewed and the book provides great insights on George HW Bush, Bill Clinton, Brent Scowcroft, Sandy Berger, Richard Holbrooke, James Baker, Colin Powell, Wesley Clark, and many other 1990s powerbrokers. Although not as good as The Best and the Brightest or The Fifties (an underrated Halberstam classic), I am glad that I read this book. If you want to learn more about some of the tough decisions of the Clinton presidency, which ostensibly started as the domestic policy presidency, and the way we looked at security threats (and politcal threats) in the 1990s, this is a very good book. Too bad the events of 2001 to 2003 have changed the world completely and we can never go back to the safer (and simpler) 1990s.

The end of the Cold War at the beginning of the 1990s seemed to usher in a new era of hope, promise, and peace. This book shows that the last expectation was wholly false. The 1990s saw more American military interventions into other countries than any other decade of American history. Haiti, Iraq, Mogadishu, Kosovo and Croatia are some of the numerous battlefronts on which American troops were sent to serve. This book chronicles this decade, and shows how the US was inexplicably drawn into each of these conflicts one by one. Key throughout most of these episodes was a Clinton administration that was reluctant to go to arms. This book shows how many times it was pressure from the media, Congress, or the opposing party (Republicans) that convinced the Clinton administration that force was necessary. In a way, this book resembles Halberstam's classic on the Vietnam War; the Best and the Brightest. In both cases, a reluctant president was slowly but steadily cornered into committing troops. This book highlights the major characters involved in the military excursion of the 1990s; Colin Powell, Tony Lake, Al Gore, Richard Holbrooke, Madeleine Albright, various UN officials and government officials of other countries.

All in all a great book. This should be required reading for any course on modern American history, or modern world history. I highly recommend it.

It took me a while to get into this book. The first two parts were pretty dull and more well known in the news - secret CIA prisons and the whole eavesdropping mess. While illegal and unconstitutional, one can argue that America's security requires the rules to be bent sometimes. I also found these two areas to be written in a much more uninteresting manner than the later parts of the book.

The rest of the book was VERY interesting and informative. Sections on what the CIA knew about WMDs in Iraq (or didn't know), the burgeoning narcotics industry in Afghanistan, Operation Merlin (giving incorrect nuclear plans to Iran), and Saudi Arabia's unwillingness in the war on terror. In all these areas, Risen points out what is sometimes the CIA's lack of sight but more often than not, the problem lies with the pentagon - especially Donald Rumsfeld.

I think a main point to take away is that the CIA must be the independent agency that it was created to be. As pointed out in this book, there was a tendency for CIA agents who agreed with and reported intelligence supporting the hawkish ideas of the administration to be promoted while those who were more cautious in judgment were thwarted. Hence the disregard of the evidence against Saddam having WMDs. It's not that the CIA was deliberately misinforming us, but that they were simply seeing what they wanted to see or seeing what the Bush Administration wanted to see. Additionally, the CIA simply had so few sources in Iraq that an adequate intelligence picture was never obtained (the same in true in Iran).

The narco-state chapter was very enlightening and disturbing. American has been tacitly allowing heroin to be mass produced in Afghanistan with proceeds indubitably going to terrorists.

Another key idea that I took away was that the Iraq War was not only folly due to the bad intel on WMDs but also let Osama get away and settle in Pakistan by the diversion of resources out of Afghanistan.

I'm surprised that liberals and Obamophiles are citing this book more since the secrets revealed are eye opening.

risen provides the reader an excellent book. it captures the attention and pulls in the reader. once in a while he introduced concepts not previously described that he ought to have explained. this is a relatively short read. it lacks credit, as risen states in the forward, to the many individuals who provided critical information but who wished to remain anonymous. the conflict, there, boils down to "do i expose my sources which could endanger their lives?" versus "is this guy making it up on the fly?". i can tell the reader that i can corroborate 95% of what was said in this text has been stated elsewhere. that other 5% is trust. he provides information on the political agenda and media schemes that were necessary to effect war in iraq. the "accidental" downloading of the list of CIA assets in Iran to a double agent makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up: i wonder if we hadn't been duped again ... the quote by israel's PM in october 2001 that israel controls america rather than the other way around was also revealing!!! it exposes the hostile environment across agencies, across individuals, across time, of the white house to "inconvenient truths". risen discusses the NSA spying capabilities upon innocent americans, relevant to the recent passage in the u.s. senate of the spying / retroactive telecomm immunity legislation that, i'd argue, was unconstitutionally passed. at only 218 pages, wide margins, extra spacing, it's easier to see the words on each page, but, as i rested the book next to me after having finished it, i felt that it lacked completion, it lacked an effort to tie things all together. this was a far-from comprehensive text on the subject, but it does add to the literature. overall, i found dozens of new reports that might be facts which made reading this specific book beyond other similar books well worthwhile the read. also, risen writes in a way that really makes sense, brings you along for a complicated ride in an uncomplicated manner. he's done an excellent job and this is an excellent addition to the literature regarding the bush administration, the cia, iraq and afghanistan wars. for anyone with an interest in such topics, i highly recommend reading this text, certainly at the discounted price.

There is a disclaimer at the front of the book explaining why most of the author's sources are anonymous.

James Risen exposes a lot of alarming activities in "State of War".
One is the domestic spying on American citizens by the U.S. government.
"Unknown to most Americans,the NSA has extremely close ties with the telecommunications and computer industries, according to several government officials." from page 49.

The use of "renditions" or international kidnappings by governmental agencies to a foregn ally that is willing to use torture during interrogations.

Mr. Risen explains the cause of Paul Wolfowitz' obsession with invading Iraq.

Some more tidbits the author shares in the book are:
*The less than stable human intelligence source(Curveball)that some high ranking CIA officials relied on as proof of Hussein's bio-weapons.

*Who the "Scorpions" were.

*Baghdad's desperate,last minute attempts to allow U.S. inspectors inside Iraq to prove that there were no WMD.

*How the Department of Defense bears a lot of the responsibilty for the failure of post-war planning.

*The idea that lack of post-war planning was a "visionary approach" and who made that bizarre statement.

*The squandered oppurtunity to eliminate or capture bin Laden in Afghanistan.

This book focuses a lot on Rumsfeld and his many failures after he took over the decision making process on the Iraq war and the war on terror. Mr. Risen also exposes how Rumsfeld militarized the intelligence apparatus. This quote sheds light on some of the activities of Rumsfeld-"Rumsfeld was creating his own secret spy service buried deep within the Pentagon's vast black budget with little or no accountability." - page 70.

He also looks at Saudi Arabia's close ties to bin Laden and terrorist groups. He mentions the clearance for takeoff of a plane bearing Saudi citizens after the 9/11 attacks. At a time when air travel was forbidden. I have read of this before, those Saudis may have been stateside for a Carlyle Group meeting?

Yesterday's television reports about the findings of why the Iraq war policy is failing have the same reasons/causes as James Risen offers in this book! This book hits the mark on some of the current hot topics regarding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and other intelligence related problems.

This book was so good that my fiance even stole it from my library and took it back to Germany with him!

Even though James Risen presented most of the information to us without any third party's confirmation or a name specified I still find them very realistic and trustful. I think this book is a very good eye opener for the people who don't have much idea about what was going on behind the scenes before and after the 9/11 attacks.

Nor do you have to be a loser to be socially responsible. Jim Hightower, irreverent NPR commentator and activist Susan de Marco show ample proof in "Swim Against the Current." They profile the sort of folks who use honesty and ingenuity to bypass the corporate catch trap. It's a can-do sort of book that will make you believe that America can still be a place where anyone can succeed without stomping all over one another, and, yeah, all over the Constitution.

In this day and age it's not only radical to think that way, but it's downright subversive! But if you have even an ounce of populist feeling in you, it'll make you cheer to read these stories. Ethical values and social responsibility aren't antithetical to success; who knew?

This is a nice collection of stories about people acting the way people should act. We might ask, why don't people act this way more often? I rather suspect more people do but stories about good behavior tend to sell fewer books. It looks like this book is suffering the same fate.
Clearly even publishing reflects the strength of the current cultural flow.

I have no doubt of Jim Hightower's sincerity and enthusiasm for his many causes, but this loose-jointed, rambling book is neither very well-organized nor deeply insightful. It is little more than a random collection of anecdotal material (much of it hackneyed -- e.g. the miracle of micro-lending; evangelicals who take a stand against global warming) about people who break out of the corporate, capitalist mode to do good for humanity. The tone is almost frantic, the pace a gallop, and the conclusions drawn from the examples ill-defined or non-existent. The prose is peppered with homespun cliches ("salt-of-the-earth Midwesterner" and "congress's kow-towing to corporate interests" appear in the same sentence) and when I put it down I felt like I had just endured a three-hour harangue from a street preacher.

Sorry, this fish don't swim.

This is one of the best books I've read in a long, long time. It makes hope for the future of our country real, and is a most valuable guide to actual, tangible ways to get involved with making this a better country, and have fun while you're at it. I would encourage anybody who would like to see less corporate involvement and more "people power" involvement with our food, energy sources, political system, etc., to read this book and get inspired to action! Includes actual contact information about the wonderful organizations he talks about. A goldmine of information. Hightower has hit it out of the park again!

I worked in the Texas Legislature many, many moons ago when Jim Hightower served as the Commissioner of Agriculture for the state of Texas. The guy had this novel idea that he was supposed to represent family farmers, not corporate agri-business interests. He was also of this bizarre notion that the producers of what we eat and what we wear were in a symbiotic relationship with those who ate and those who wore clothes. What a guy! He understood that one must break a few eggs to make an omelet. And he personified the old-fashioned idea that it was time for farmers to 'raise less corn and raise more hell.'

Hightower and his compadre, Susan DeMarco, have written another excellent piece of work on how average folks can take control of their economic and political destiny. A message that seems to have been lost on many within the Democratic Party.

What an approriately named book. Keep after 'em Hightower!

I enjoyed the book, but, as usual after reading more of how the Bush Administration screwed up not only the war, but foreign policy in general; it tends to depress a person. This book is similar to State of Denial, Bush at War, Part III by Bob Woodward and The Greatest Story ever SOLD, The rise and fall of Truth in Bush's America by Frank Rich. In Woodward's book, Bush is portrayed as out of touch when things need to change, he "stays the course" in Iraq as things fall apart. In the Greatest Story ever SOLD, the lies, misstatements, spin, misrepresentations and deliberate falsehoods of the Bush Administration, particularly relating to Iraq are revealed and revealing how the media played along even knowing differently.

In Daydream Believers, the author submits that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice among others misread the meaning of the end of the Cold War. They saw America with unfettered power and thus could do anything the US wanted without regard to allies and any others when in reality the end of the Cold War gave us less power because other countries were less constrained by having to side either with the Soviet Union or the United States. Because of this misreading, Bush and others made disastrous decisions relating to foreign policy and the war in Iraq, adopting a "go it alone" policy. In the end, Kaplan lays blame also on the Democrats for not resisting this president and the Republican Congress that led us down this path.

How American foreign policy got so off-track in the 21st Century has been well covered in other books. Why it got so off-track is the subject of this book.

It stems from two huge misconceptions made by the Bush White House and the neo-cons. The first is that, on 9/11, the world did not change. It certainly changed in that America suddenly found itself more vulnerable than ever before. But the nature of power, politics and warfare did not change. The second is that, after the Cold War, America found itself as the world's only superpower. With its superior military technology, America thought that it was now free to topple unfriendly regimes, ignore treaties and generally do whatever it wanted around the world. Now that the Soviet Union was gone as an enemy, Cold War allies no longer felt compelled to see things America's way. An American president could deal with this new landscape in one of two ways: emphasize the military, and don't hesitate to use American power around the world, or, emphasize diplomacy, and restructure old alliances (and create new ones) around the world.

The invasion of Iraq was supposed to be the example of Bush's belief that, with Saddam Hussein out of the way, Iraq will suddenly turn into a democratic country, and that democracy will spread throughout the Mideast. The Pentagon cared more about the military part than about the aftermath. Turmoil in Iraq was practically guaranteed by the first two decrees issued by Paul Bremer in the early days of the occupation: disbanding the Iraqi army, and removing all Baathists from the government.

The author also looks at the Administration's decision to abrogate the ABM Treaty with Russia, and resume deployment of Ronald Reagan's missile defense shield, despite the fact that its operational capabilities are somewhere between questionable and non-existent.

This is a really good book, and I learned something from it. There is more than just facts and figures here; the author profiles people in the military world, some of whom do not get their names in the media. It's worth reading.

I served my country for nine years before creaky knees put me out of the Navy and into a writer's seat. Whether behind a desk, behind enemy lines--or just the back of the bread line--Americans watch the 2000 Bush Administration with growing dismay.

Even as Iraq somewhat stabilizes, the Taliban resurges in Afghanistan, while a Second Cold War brews with Russia. For every Libya that seems to bow before the Bush Doctrine, America faces a defiant North Korea.

Enter Columnist Fred Kaplan. He asks nothing--not how this happened, or why--because he has an answer.

I don't often read magazines, but I find Kaplan articles intelligent enough. His style strikes me as straight and clear, if also a bit graceless. In *Daydream Believers: How A Few Grand Ideas Wrecked America Power*, Kaplan comes out swinging:

"Nearly all of America's blunders in war and peace these past few years stem from a single, grand misconception: that the world changed after September 11, when in fact it didn't."

With that hook, Kaplan argues that American leadership hung up on four major fallacies:

--The illusion of "shock and awe" victories in Afghanistan and Iraq--
--The inflexible righteousness of President Bush--
--The preoccupation with the ideal of missile defense.
--The ignorance and myth of Bush foreign policy.

Daydream Believers isn't just a light-weight alternative to State of Denial, or any these other massive tomes on the controversies of Bush Doctrine. For Mr. Kaplan concentrates on hereditary policy--on the recurrent theories and strategies assembled during the Cold War, then road-tested during the 1990's before driving off into that Bush sunset.

The book generally does not recreate conversations and meetings. Nor does it detail interviews and events during historical moments. Nevertheless, Kaplan cites and condenses a large number of sources for it slim size. He builds his book mainly from second or third hand information: from previous studies such as *Rise of the Vulcans* and Bob Woodward's "Bush at War" series, as well as television interviews and internet transcripts. He also cites declassified documents from a variety of archives, on the internet and elsewhere. Finally, a few personal interviews round out the foundation. It's not as credible as the extensive original research in many of its big brothers, but Daydream Believers does the job here.

Sometimes in a hurried and disjointed manner. Going over Kaplan's old columns, I recognize statements from *Daydream Believers*. For example, I found similar remarks about North Korean policy in the May 2004 article "Rolling Blunder"--the section "Sunshine and moral clarity" is repeated almost verbatim in the book. Overall, it seems he built *Daydream* by combining and expanding various articles. This isn't necessarily bad--it probably saved some time and energy--but it does limit the flow and the scope. Certain chapters delve much more into history than others--most notably missile defense--and the use of examples to support his topics tend to be uneven.

In the chapter, "Chasing Silver Bullets", Kaplan takes us back to the 1950's, and methodically works his way up to 2004. It's a showcase of Kaplan's expertise--he previously published a book on nuclear war strategy--as well as a relevant exploration of where these Grand Ideas come from. The rest of the book, unfortunately, does not offer this depth of exploration. Kaplan does dip back into the 20th Century from time to time, when exploring North Korean policy in Chapter 2, or the general philosophy of the Bush Doctrine in Chapter 4, but these sections lack the same sense of specific history and chronological connections found in "Silver Bullets".

Kaplan may have been keen on rushing this book out in time for the troop surge--I received the proof for review in August 2007--or he wanted to focus like a laser on certain issues. Whatever the reason, these stylistic issues aren't deal breakers. Though one could always argue that his choices hamper credibility, another might appreciate Kaplan's brevity and overall accessibility.

For me, certain omissions keep Daydream Believers from being all it could be.

The image of a black-hooded prisoner hooked to electrical wires has been burned into my conscious, if not many Americans. Thus the policies of "enemy combatant" and extraordinary rendition--combined with the rampant prisoner abuse scandals--must stand among the essential fallacies of the Bush Doctrine. Few subjects illustrate the weakening of American power more--or appear less in the text.

I can think of a few subjects, though. The obvious politicization of intelligence also deserves its own chapter. Having served under both Clinton and Bush, in the combat nerve center of a warship, I know from experience the roles that intelligence can play... as well as the disparity between interpretations. The leap to conclusions, from the impotence of Iraq to an imminent apocalypse, surely counts as one of those Grand Ideas which wrecked our power.

Finally, grand ideas are not limited to Cabinet meetings. I'm particularly interested in the John Wayne attitude of the White House, and the general air of a bad eighties action movie which permeates its activities. Our culture is plainly an influence on our decisions, and I have thought for years that voters, tax payers, and elected leader alike made the mistake of applying Tom Clancy novels to the real world.

As a Cliff Notes to the foibles of American power under Bush, readers could do worse than Daydream Believers, but I feel the content doesn't measure up to the breadth and depth of Kaplan's thesis. In future editions, the author should look at:

--include a chapter on prisoner abuse and the attitude which made it permissible under a democracy.
--include a chapter on the historic fallacies and problems of intelligence interpretation by the White House.
--and explore some of the pop culture fallacies which enabled America to initially support their wayward president.

Let me start out by saying that this is the first 'current affairs' book I've read about the current administration so this book probably impressed me more than if I had some more knowledge when I began reading it.

Positives: Well-written and interesting chapters - one on the rise of 'transformation' weapons that have been utilized in the current wars, a very eye-opening chapter on the USA and North Korea, another informative chapter on the history of missile defense, and then a couple dryer chapters on the Bush administration and Iraq. What I enjoyed about the first three chapters and the book overall, is that it was more than a anti-Bush diatribe but an interesting history of advanced weaponry and foreign policy from the Cold War to present.

Negatives: Kaplan's account suffers heavily from the narrative fallacy - it is easy to see in hindsight the blunders of the Bush administration; it is easy to explain the muck of Iraq in terms of definite strategic and tactical errors; but were those mistakes so apparent as they were happening? The last chapter especially comes off as a chapter more or less saying 'Bush can do no right".

Despite the negatives, the reader will learn a great deal on what the author sees as the major blunders leading to the continuing occupation of Iraq (the de-Baathification in Iraqi politics, the dispersement of the Iraqi army, and the failure to capture Iraqi ammo depots). Ultimately, Rumsfeld is blamed for these issues - the primary one being the low amount of troops assigned to Iraq initially.

W. Bush comes off as a highly principled leader yet woefully uninformed in the reality of world politics. Kaplan takes Bush at his word that he sincerely desires to promote democracy and freedom - and that these are attainable when dictators are deposed (democratic freedom being the natural state of man).

Much of Kaplan's book hinges on his interpretation (?) that Bush and the neo-cons saw a chance to get rid of evil regimes and extend America's power when the Cold War ended. They believed that America would naturally fill the vacuum left by the Soviets and thereby exert an even larger influence on the world. What was not expected, is that much of the world was out of our control and did not want to be in our control - in short we were blinded by our hubris.

Daydream Believers, by Kaplan, was a FANTASTIC book. Interesting, well written, and important, Kaplan offers much more than the title led me to believe. Of course, it is another book on the mistakes of the Bush Administration's foreign policy, particularly regarding Iraq, but the book is grander than that. The best parts: 1) fascinating overview of about a half century of US military strategy (this is what makes the book so strong); 2) necessary look at the totality of the Bush foreign policy, rather than just a focus on Iraq; 3) interesting look at America's efforts to build a missile defense system; 4) the mistakes of the Democratic Party in failing to offer a realistic alternative to the current Administration's foreign policy; 5) and a fine statement on the need for a foreign policy that properly balances realism/national interests, with the legitimate pursuit of high minded goals for the world.
If I have to find a bad part, I guess some of the information contained here is a bit redundant after all that has been said by those critiquing the Bush mistakes, particularly on Iraq. But those mistakes need repeating. Not that the repetition will prevent