Clinton Books

ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS READ MY REVIEW ON MONICA'S BOOK THEN YOU WILL NOT HAVE TO WASTE ANY MORE OF YOUR PRECIOUS TIME...PS: FOR ALL THOSE INTERESTED...IF YOU ARE PATIENT ENOUGH YOU CAN READ IT ALL FOR FREE..IT WILL NO DOUBT BE IN OUR PUBLIC LIBRARIES EVERY WHERE...(LOL)....

I was brought back to the Starr Report after reading and reviewing the 9/11 Commission Report. I found the 9/11 Report to be lacking as a legitimate investigative report: it was incomplete, imprecise, and full of statements which were arrived at through compromises between Republican members and Democrat members.

One reviewer who, like many, disliked the Starr Report, drew a comparison using the 9/11 Report as the model of a good report. Many reviewers of the Starr Report refer to it as sleazy, pornographic, etc. Obviously, those reviewers have no idea what an investigative report is supposed to be. An investigative report provides the information an attorney or prosecutor is going to use to prepare his case. It must report the findings; fully, accurately, and precisely. Imagine an investigator who writes a report on a brutal rape case. For the sake of prudence he chooses not to mention certain female body parts as well as acts that are either titillating or repulsive. That report would be a waste of time and effort.

Ken Starr's job was to investigate and report; fully, accurately, and precisely. The notion that he did not have to include some of the more lurid details is ridiculous. The investigator is not supposed to delete things he doesn't like or add things that seem nice (as 9/11 Commission did in some cases). That would be up to the prosecutor, in this case the house judiciary committee.

The Starr Report is an example of an investigator doing his job correctly. The criticisms that were reported by compliant media were nothing but an attempt to further demonize the investigator for the purpose of evoking sympathy for President Clinton. In that sense, it worked.

If you believe the apocolypse is nearing, read this book! The sleaziness is beyond anything ever written in Playboy, the use of descriptive words are hilarious, and, amazingly, I learned new ways to have sex! Read this book!

This whole investigation, MILLIONS of Democrat and Republican taxpayer's dollars spent chasing the Republican's dream of revenge on Democrats for past occurences, has been a total waste of time. This book is evidence not of the wrongdoing, or moral corruption, of a president, but rather it is evidence of an overzealous man who was consumed by a hatred that is beyond what would be reasonable for an unbiased person. History will record Clinton as basically good, but flawed man. History will record Starr as biased, obsessed investigator who was intent on "getting his man" using any means possible, right or wrong. That is if history remembers Mister Starr at all.

Though titillating, this book, like Starr's entire investigation, is a complete waste of money. First off, its just REALLY BAD, and second, you can read it for free in the paper or on the web

This has been the best book on clothing I've seen. They are NOT here to tell you your style like "classic," "bohemian," "Victorian"... What they do is tell you how to deal with your body shape. They steer you toward the best style clothing for your body shape.

There are women and men of every shape in three heights: petite, average and tall and everyone is dressed in a black swimsuit (for women) and boxers (for men).
You determine where you fit in the shape category and height and then read the advise to look your best.

It is very straight forward and concise which is a huge help for just getting the facts.

You can glean from the other body shapes as well but clothing for your shape is right there in a nutshell.

I liked this book the first time I read it, and liked it more when I reread the sections that most applied to me. It's packed with concise observations and recommendations, delivered in a friendly, humorous, vibrant style. I haven't seen any other books for men that address the obvious differences in men's bodies and what works best on those who are short, tall, barrel-chested, big-waisted, etc. etc. At most there is a paragraph or two; most of the advice only applies to average height slim men. I found that several of the types applied to me most directly; but "universal tips" are found throughout the section for men, so all of it is worth reading. Some of the tips in the section for women also apply to men. I would actually like Clinton and Stacy to write another book organized differently, in which they could systematically take up questions like "what colors go together?" (for the clueless newbies among us) and color theory more generally, color considerations and skin tone, different kinds of fabrics, and just clothing issues thematically.

One thing I've noticed in the several books I have read on style is how often an author contradicts himself or lays down rules that other authors contradict, or just generally states rules without much rationale that seem really idiosyncratic to me. I didn't see a single statment in Clinton and Stacy's book that fell down in this regard, and that's high praise.

Great book! Not only do you get information on how to dress your own particular body shape, but the book is filled with "universal tips" in every section. Also included is a list of items for properly stocking your closet... for both women and men. For those who need just a little help and for those who don't have a clue, this is a great buy!

I purchased this book because my 13 year old daughter LOVES watching "What Not to Wear". It has helped her to learn more about how to look the way she wants to look and not to look "made up". It is a great how-to for anyone of any age.

I am an avid watcher of the weekly television show What Not To Wear, so when I saw this book, I added it to my Amazon wishlist. I finally got around to buying it last week, and I am about to leave my desk right now to ship it back.

Although the advice is sound, the entire book only had 3 pages relevant to me. I'm sorry, but I'm not paying $16 for a book that I can only read/use 3 pages of.

I was able to find my body type, which is not curvy, average height, and it included some good tips about fit for my body type...but the rest of the book was useless to me.

I thought the book was going to be about putting together a look, and how to shop for specific items, but it wasn't.

My recommendation to anyone who is looking for a book about style and how to put together looks is this...don't buy this book, buy The Lucky Shopping Manual: Building and Improving Your Wardrobe Piece by Piece, which actually has tons and tons of great advice for how to develop your style and what items you need, etc. They also have another great book coming out in Oct. called The Lucky Guide to Mastering Any Style: Creating Iconic Looks and Making Them Your Own, which has information about how to put together the 10 most popular fashion styles (rock and roll, bohemian, etc)...now THAT book I can't wait to buy, and I know it will be worth every penny.

I read this from cover to cover and found that Mr. Schippers substantial information listed. However, I also found that all but one accusation was pure speculation and was mostly contradicted by contrary evidence. I'm a firm believer in innocent until proven guilty.

Schippers Claimed that Clinton & Gore pushed to get Aliens registered so they can vote for Democrats.
- Wrong. The INS was way behind schedule and so Gore and Clinton both pushed to get on track. Needless to say, It was a really bad idea as people serving time found themselves being naturalized.

He also claims that Clinton coached Lewinsky, Curie and Vernon.
- Correct. He did seem to advocate denial and probably even directed Lewinsksy on how to set up an affidavit so she wouldn't have to testify.

Lewinsky's affidavit was purchased in exchange for a job she wasn't qualified for.
- Unsubtiated. She did create a affidavit and found a job that Schippers considered her to be unqualified for.

He stated that Paula Jones's affidavit was purchased in a out of court deal.
The record was sealed shortly afterwards.

He raped Juanita Broddrick.
- Unknown. This coming from a 3rd party, not Ms Broddrick. In '92, Miss Broddrick signed an affadavit stating that Clinton didn't rape her.

* Clinton and Gore deliberately solicited donations from foreign governments.
Clinton requested a thorough investigation of the issue, resulting in several friends of Clinton and Gore being convicted. But no one could find a tie to Clinton/Gore despite the flowing testimony. Schippers claimed that he was not given sufficient time to investigate the issue.

Chicago attorney David Schippers accepted the historic and ultimately thankless task of prosecuting the President of the United States of America. When the House of Representatives passed Articles of Impeachment against President Clinton, it marked only the second time in US history that a president had been impeached. "Sell Out" is the account of Mr. Schippers going to Washington.

Unlike the previous impeachment of President Andrew Johnson, there are few members of the Senate likely to be immortalized as "Profiles in Courage" for displaying heroism and integrity during the trial. Schippers was not given a meaningful opportunity to present his full case before the Senate. Relevant evidence was suppressed. Unlike the House of Representatives which performed its constitutional duties, the Senate wanted no part of the impeachment and several notables worked behind the scenes to make certain that Clinton would obtain a prompt acquittal regardless of his guilt. The show trial that resulted bordered upon theater of the absurd.

Columnist Ben Stein observed that whatever one might think of former President Richard M. Nixon, he had the underlying decency to resign rather than subject the nation to an impeachment proceeding and a trial. Clinton had no such scruples and chose to play politics. Character assassination attacks (remember the F.B.I. raw files that the White House improperly collected after Clinton was first inaugurated?) were conducted against several Representatives who took an active role in pressing the impeachment issue, including the late Henry Hyde.

Following Hyde's recent death, it has been reported that the leaders of the House of Representatives were prepared to accept a resolution censuring Clinton for perjury, but attempts by the White House to blackmail various members of the Congress by exposing past scandals in their private lives had an unintended consequence: rather than causing Congress to dismiss the censure resolution, it actually stiffened the resolve of those favoring impeachment and solidified several wavering votes of those who had been sitting on the fence.

This book paints a damning picture of the political class that is bipartisan. Senator Trent Lott wanted no part of the impeachment and scolded the House Managers for bringing the case. This is a depressing, but nonetheless vital read. It seems especially relevant in light of the fact that another election featuring the Clintons is fast approaching.

The short book contains numerous pages of documents and exhibits. The actual text is not that lengthy as exhibits make up a considerable portion of the volume. The narrative is adequate, but not quite perfect otherwise I would have rated the book higher than I did above.

Do you remember: "Just the facts mam".I am glad that I read this book before the 2008 election. I have a few questions--1. Why did Janet Reno and the Justice Department refused to cooperate with the investigation? 2.Why is it that some people want to kill the messenger than look at the message? 3.Why did 5 Democratic congressmen (Barney Frank-Mass., Howard Berman-Calf.,Rick Boucher-Va.,Jerrold Nadler-Ny., Melvin Watt-NC.) on the committee, never signed into the secure room to view the evidence? 4.What evidence is sealed and under lock and key for the next fifty years? I do not have a short memory and I will remember. I am amazed and disappointed that some Republicans and Democrats were not familiar with honesty, justice, good moral character and doing the right thing. Thank you David Schippers, the title Sell Out-fits like a glove.

Note that this review is long after the publication of this book but Mr. Schippers' book is a timeless monument to his integrity and a searing indictment of our Congress and especially Bill Clinton and friends.

An even greater travesty is that this book apparently was given a "pass" by the mainstream intelligentsia and dismissed by the mainstream media.

If you really care about this country and its poloitical future, please read this book. I implore you to do so with an open mind. I acknowledge that I am a Republican but this book should worry readers on both sides of the aisle.

Mr. Schippers is a great American and my nominee for a Medal of Freedom. The Constitution really means something to him in its most literal language.

This is quick revisionism from a hired gun. Perhaps the events of the Clinton presidency are too soon for anyone, liberal or conservative, to be objective, but it will never happen if people keep buying books like this.

As any reader will discern, Sidney Blumenthal has enormous affection for the Clintons and great regard for the role of the Clinton Administration in American history. That bias does not detract from the fact that Blumenthal's grasp of history and intimate knowledge of the Clinton Administration has yielded an analysis that is must-reading for any serious student of this era in American political life. Blumenthal is a committed Democrat and a Clinton warrior. But he also a supremely gifted thinker, an elegant writer, and tough-minded American patriot.

This book contains a lot of good information and is quite well written. It is not objective, however. The author spends most of his time complimenting Clinton and his policies/strategies. It's not quite as bad as being told Reagan's presidency was a time when "Character was King", but it does wear on you after a while.

first, a disclaimer: i actually liked the clinton presidency, even if i didn't care too much for the man himself. and i think hillary was right when she spoke of the "vast right-wing conspiracy," even though i thought she was cracked at the time.

so: all i can say about this book is that blumenthal appears to be assuming the same position monica lewinsky did. this is a book written by a man with an astonishing ability to suppress the gag reflex. he is a clinton worshipper.

imo, this is the book's major failing. blumenthal can see no wrong where his friend and president is concerned; he spends pages upon pages justifying, praising, and illuminating the clinton legacy. i could not read more than a chapter at a time -- a very unusual occurrence for me.

to be fair, the book does an excellent job of setting out the timeline of events that plagued clinton's presidency, as well as connecting the dots between certain right-wing actors and clinton's public approval ratings. some of the anecdotes are amusing; some of the observations are insightful. but that still didn't overcome my desire to wash my hands every time i put the book down.

Blumenthal writes passionately about the Clinton presidency as you would expect.
The first 200 pages or so are comments on the first term where he did not work for Clinton, and I only skimmed through those as it was mostly references to other sources.
The next 500 pages are much more personal and although nothing new and surprising comes out, Blumenthal still writes a fairly balanced account of the events and shows his brilliant polical and intellectual mind on many occassions.
An important part of the history writing of the Clinton presidency.

In trying to fairly review this book, as politics has gotten ugly and mean and divided this nation, let's imagine that someone from my favorite island (Tristan da Cunha) sets foot in the USA with no more knowledge of Clinton than he was the leader of the country recently. He wants to know more, so he picks up this book and reads it. Our man from Tristan will be able to tell that Sidney Blumenthal likes and admires Bill Clinton a lot. That's not a knock against Mr. Blumenthal in the least, as other authors have liked and admired their subjects, too - that's why they do a fine job of writing about them, their personal interest shows. But in reading this book, the Tristan man will also learn that Mr. Clinton oversaw continuous economic expansion, more than 22 million jobs created, a home ownership rate increase from 64.0% to 67.5%, the lowest unemployment rate in 30 years, higher incomes at all levels, the largest budget deficit in American history converted to the largest surplus of over $200 billion, the lowest government spending as a percentage of GDP since 1974, higher stock ownership by families than ever before, a 220% increase in the Dow Jones Industrial Average, and a 300% increase in the Nasdaq from 1993 to 2001.

Sounds like a heckuva job of improving America to me. So why is Mr. Clinton one of those "50%" people, half love him and half hate him? Mr. Blumenthal lays out a few reasons for the hate that still resounds today, and at base level it's all politics. the hatred and vitrol directed at Mr. Clinton and family is absolutely, positively, moronically senseless. We spent in excess of $70M trying to find something, anything, on a duly elected president, and it all ended up with an impeachment charge that seems as wispy as smoke today as it did in 1998. And it was all over a private matter that, under normal circumstances, would be settled between a husband and wife. The general mood of the country during the 1990s into the 2000s is as if we were one nation before Clinton took office; one group decided that we were two nations after he took office and open warfare on Clinton was continuous; and after he left office we should pretend we're one nation again. The media has their fair share of blame in this sordid trashing of Clinton's presidency, too - our So-Called Liberal Media showed its colors brightly from 1992 to 2001. I didn't agree with all of his policies and still don't, but personal attacks were never part of the disagreement. But beyond the political reason, why do we trash this man who tried to do so much for this country? Calling him names doesn't answer the question of why. Skim away your prejudices, read the book and see if you think that we had some pretty darn good days under President Clinton.

An argument brought up is that at 822 pages, this might have been a couple hundred pages too long. There is a lot of personal information that Mr. Blumenthal includes about himself in here, like growing up and going to school. At first glance, there is the thought that this information is superfluous; on the other hand, given his deep involvment with the subject and the President, The Clinton Wars were also The Blumenthal Wars, fought over the same fronts. It's a long book, but it's worth reading.

The author, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, a British newspaperman, came to the States without preconceived judgment of the Clintons, an attitude which changed as time passed. He observed the difference between public utterances and private behavior too often screened from view by a fawning press which persists even unto today. Barnum said you can fool some of the people some of the time but you can't fool all of the people all of the time, but the Clintons et al made a pretty good stab at it --. No one should go to the polls to vote without having read Pritchard.

I purchased this book after hearing review after review of it from my family members. Needless to say, they were right - this book is an absolute bombshell of information that pinpoints most, if not all of the ethical and legal faux pas raised by the Clinton Administration and the organizations under that regime. Some of the highlights include how the FBI blundered Waco, how the Murrah building was most definately more than a one-person job (but was apparently ordered not to investigate it as such), how Clinton was dealing in cocaine trafficking and how the Clintons managed to cover all of this up with the help of the liberal media.

... Ambrose Evans-Pritchard documents everything he asserts based on facts of witness testimony, comparing FBI affadavits, and other documents related to these cases. If there is any flaw with the book is that Pritchard couldn't 100% tie all of the incidents to Clinton, though 95% of the crimes mentioned in the book can be easily seen how they tie to Clinton or to someone high up in the Clinton administration.

I reiterate - this book is a must-read to anyone who is sick and tired of hearing how great the Clinton Administration is, and should be read by those people who continue to profess how wonderful Clinton was.

I just read this book for the second time after having read it a few years ago. It's amazing how time dulls the memory. I had forgotten about all of the scandals and crimes associated with the Clintons and it is chilling that after all of this time the Clintons still have not been held accountable and at this time Hillary is even in the running to become our next president.

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard has written a well-documented and well-researched book from years of investigation and interviews. He has meticulously laid out the evidence for the Clintons association with the Oklahoma bombing, Vince Foster's death, the sad murder of Kevin Ives, the "Dixie Mafia" and even Paula Jones.

I can understand why those who are enamored of Bill Clinton will not like this book but in typical left-wing form those who have given this book only one star and complain that it is filled with lies offer no facts to refute those supposed lies.

To the people who read this book, you really should do some research on the author, who was sure that he was going to be killed by Clinton's "Death Squads" while writing this. It's a perfect book to feed the conservative paranoia that the Clinton years cultivated. The guy couldn't even have a successful affair without getting caught, how he could have managed all that he is accused of in this book is borderline absurd. And the section regarding the advanced knowledge of the Oklahoma bombing is just plain ridiculous, especially when you compare it to the recent allegation of the Bush administration's advance knowledge of 9/11 activities. It's easy to dislike Clinton when you're a conservative, I understand, and this book certainly gives you fuel for the fire. But no one should take anything in this book as entirely factual or of any journalistic value. The elaborate footnotes and "documentation" are an almost comedic exersize in logical thinking. But hey, I'm not going to knock a book that so many people like. The only thing I object to is its classification as a "non-fiction" book.

This is a chronicle of how the Clintons and their twelve years in the governor's mansion of Arkansas and two terms in the office of the Presidency have left our democratic institutions in shambles. From a perch at the pinnacle of the Dixie Mafia, Hot Springs Arkansas, they have taken the nation on a descent down into "anti-democratic" hell, from which the Republic may never recover. This book is a virtual catalogue of how they did it: an unimaginable tale of corruption and abuses of power that, in comparison, will make the Monica Lewinsky scandal seem like a Sunday school picnic.

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard a reporter for London's Sunday Telegraph uses his considerable investigative skills and his diplomatic immunity from the Clinton terror tactics to weave a series of tales that will literally make the reader's hair stand on end. Everything here has the ring of truth. But even if it did not, and a tenth of it is correct, then we are already living deep inside a "well-regulated" police state.

One word of caution to the reader: A great deal of this is circumstantial and hearsay evidence, however, as will become obvious to any astute reader: in a "soft police state," after witnesses have been intimidated, cajoled and murdered; documents have been tampered with, lost or shredded; drug money has been laundered and reinvested; subpoenas have been ignored or squashed; secrecy and plausible deniability have been invoked to shield everything from the public; we have a sycophantic incurious press, and public officials have been muted, silenced, bribed or coached into lying -- all up and down the line -- there isn't much else left but hearsay and circumstantial evidence. Plus, there is so much of this kind of evidence that its preponderance and very cross-confirmation alone takes on a life of its own, that is to say, it lends to these stories a kind of credibility and credence of its own.

In each of the scandals included -- from the Okalahoma City bombing cover up, to the reasons for Vince Foster's and Jerry Parks murders, to Dan Lasater, Don Tyson, and the Stephen's brothers cocaine empire -- run by the Clintons out of the Arkansas Development Finance Administration (ADFA) -- to complicity in a contract to murder Colonel Terry Reed -- this is in every respect a blue print for how to turn our democracy into the world's largest "soft police state."

In short, this book is nothing if not the anatomy of a "soft police state" in the making, with the State of Arkansas taking the lead in the descent into irretrievable corruption. How does it happen? The subtext of this book gives us a step-by-step manual for how its done: When unchecked power, secrecy, a complacent public, weak kneed and corrupt political authorities and ruling elites, a press that will not face the reality before it, and large illicit sums of drug money, collide; and then collude: morality and civility are the first to go out the window. And then our democracy is in grave if not mortal danger.

Like a snake lying coiled waiting ready to spring on its prey from the grass, unwary citizens were enticed, lured, seduced or co-opted inside the circle of the Clinton corruption. Once inside, the noose is tightened and the trap door slammed shut. There are no exits except to "go on the lam" as Colonel Terry Reed, L. D. Brown, Patty-Ann Smith and Dennis Patrick did; or to play ball and pretend to love it, as Patsy Thomasson and Bob Nash, and so many others did; or be committed to jail or suicide as was done to Sarah McClendon; or be banished to purgatory as Paula Jones and Monica Lewinski were, or indeed give up your life as Vince Foster, Barry Seal and Jerry Parks did.

The author's thoughts are best summarized on page 316 when he is discussing the issue of Mena, Arkansas:

"What makes [the Iran Contra affair] so fascinating today is evidence that the CIA's base of operation was actively involved. The idea that an outwardly liberal and progressive Democrat like Bill Clinton was secretly assisting Oliver North's crusade against the Revolucion Sandinista is so shocking that the American press has dismissed it out of hand. But it is precisely because Mena turns the world upside down that it matters so much. If true, it validates the inchoate suspicion felt by many Americans that things are not what they seem. It suggests that the political rhetoric of the two parties in Washington is mere window dressing, while the real decisions are made in secret collusion without democratic accountability. To examine Mena is to examine the institutional condition of the United States. As for the president, it exposes him as a remarkable counterfeit, willing to betray his liberal principles for self-advancement."

This is truly scary stuff. Five stars

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.

Give! Give money. Give time. Give Stuff. This book is all about how to give more to charity. If you are inclined to give, I think this book might give you some new places to look. If you aren't inclined to give, neither will it convince you to start.

The book is a laundry list of ways to give. I enjoyed the writing style. It's a pretty quick read, and I made a fair number of notes about things to go look up further. However there are not good citations for various provided statistics which makes them a little suspect.

The book really doesn't rank alternatives, give suggestions for which are better in the author's opinion, or otherwise make suggestions. I would prefer to see a more clear distinction of what works and what doesn't. In this sense it fails to come through on the 'How each of us can change the world' portion of the title. Examples of affecting 1,000,000 lives are mixed in with examples of helping 10 people. Giving is *not* a social good on its own. It's the impact of the giving which most of us care about. This book just focuses on the giving.

Although there are chapters on Organizing Markets and social business' and other ways to give that are more aligned with the way I think philanthropy should be done, the book is essentially about old fashioned charity and volunteering. I personally have some basic philosophical difficulties with this model of social good. I prefer to see things done either at the societal level as advocated in Sachs' "The End of Poverty: Economic Possibilities for Our Time", or through social business similar to what is advocated in Yunnus' "Creating a World Without Poverty: Social Business and the Future of Capitalism". My primary problem with individual charity is that it calls on the good hearted to bear more of the burden than the greedy. I prefer systems that either make everyone equally accountable for societies needs, or provide rewards for satisfying society's needs. While this is a gross simplification, in my opinion, if you want to do some good, go get an MBA and do it on a big scale. I'm not much a fan of sacrificing personally if you are not in a position to do so. This book seems to advocate that everyone should give, even if they can do little, and even if they don't pick the recipient carefully.

I was a bit disappointed in the final chapter titled "How Much Should You Give and Why?". It stopped short of actually addressing the question, instead basically saying "it's an individual decision". I think I would have preferred a stronger statement which could have served as a center of debate, but I suppose a history in politics prevents strong statements.

This book was basically a very long list of amazing people giving time or money (or both) to very thoughtful and important causes. These people volunteer here. this guy had a great idea and created an NGO there. The spirit of it is very flat and reads like an extended laundry list.

Giving, in itself, is of course, important. Giving as a book, I didn't find that inspirational.

Giving is a straight forward 211+ page reason why we should give our time, money, and energy to help make a difference in he world. Clinton, fills the pages with nothing short of inspirational stories of incredible people, and how they have made an impact on the lives of others. Clinton argues that its easy to find a way to give to our world through examples of these extraordinary people such as; Bill and Melinda Gates, Oprah Winfrey, Oseola McCaty, Muhammad Yunus, Andre Agassi, Nelson Mandela, Josephine Murebwayire, Bono, and countless others whose stories were told through the pen of Bill Clinton.

Giving is easy to read, and its formatted so that you don't have read each chapter in its given numerical order, you can skip around and still feel the message. This book breaks down philanthropy into six different categories; giving time, giving things, giving skills, gift of reconciliation and new beginnings, gifts that keep giving, and giving good ideas.

Clinton makes it easy for you to want to give, not only because of the remarkable stories but because he provides all the contact information in the back for every charity, non-profit and nongovernmental organization that he mentioned to help tell his story. He does this because, "if your willing to volunteer, there is no shortage of organizations and projects that will be gland to welcome you."

Though at times some parts of the book can read a little like a brag sheet for Hillary, it doesn't take away from his main focal points. Overall it's a book that leaves you feeling inspired, motivated, informed, and ready to take action. So if you have a moment, try Giving this book a chance.

You know that part called 'Acknowledgements' which is available in almost every book and covers three or so pages? Ever read one of those? I bet you skip those pages every time!

The first two-thirds of this book gave me the exact same feeling. Every chapter covers too much names that are soon to be forgotten by the time you enter the next chapter. No matter how inspiring these people are, you cannot ask the average reader to remember the UNC, DDA, EXRE and whatever NGO is being mentioned.

And then, out of the blue, the book does get interesting. Most of this is due to the change in writing and you get a sense of personal touch in its writings. It doesn't even surprise me if Mr. Clinton only wrote some of this book.

The people mentioned in this book deserve better than just being a paragraph in a chapter. Maybe Mr. Clinton should call his good ol' pal Al and make a documentary about this book, because it does hold award-winning content...

Charitable giving is a regular part of life for many Americans and one man who wants to encourage Americans to integrate giving into their daily lives is former U.S. President Bill Clinton. The former U.S. Chief Executive has his own foundation dedicated to the cause of world health and other issues and he wrote this book to educate the reader on the different ways to give and the visible difference that a little effort can make. Writing a check or offering a credit card number to donate cash is the most common way that people give, but like Clinton explains in this book, there are many other ways to give that are just as important and equally valuable. Serving as a volunteer for an important cause, teaching others how to read, or donating used goods are among the many other ways by which an individual can help to improve the lives of others.

Americans are a very charitable people and Clinton frequently praises the generosity of others in the book's opening chapters and in other segments of the reading. As many people know, Bill Clinton joined with former president George H.W. Bush to help raise money for Tsunami victims and for those devastated by Hurricane Katrina and he points this out several times in the books chapters. Clinton wanted to demonstrate how most any people- even those who were once political rivals- can join forces for a common cause. No matter what one's political affiliation, most anyone will agree that charitable giving is important and commendable. It should be part of everyone's lifestyle, provided they have the means to give. And regardless of the size of the gifts, giving is still helpful and should always be encouraged. This book makes mention of mega- givers like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, but it is quick to point out that small gifts also make a big difference.

One of the many positive experiences I gained from reading this book is the knowledge about specific charities. Many of the charities mentioned in Giving are well- established, but there are several surprises. One is a charity called Chess in the Schools, which teaches chess to inner city youth as a means to improve learning in other areas. Yet another is a charity called H.O.P.E, which was founded by a group of high school students who wanted to break the cycle of poverty and disease in other countries. Information on these and other charities (including web site addresses) are found in the book's Resources section. I have already visited the web sites of several different groups and I am likely to add some of them to my list of important causes for future giving.

Overall, Giving is a very good book about the difference that each one of us can make. The fact that Bill Clinton is the author will likely discourage many people from giving this book a read and that is a shame because there is plenty of good information in Giving. Politics aside, this is a positive, well- written, non- controversial book about the different means to give, the different causes to support, and the different ways we can all make the world a better place. Its optimistic tone and strong message make it a good book for all, and hopefully one that will inspire others to devote more time and effort to the virtue of giving.

Isikoff takes the reader into the inner machinations of the Clinton White House. There is often a tendency to cricify reporters who write on such subject matter, administrations it seems, will continually try to thwart the efforts of dogged reporters. Such is one of the many cat and mouse games of Washington. I will not question Isakoff's authority as a journalist, he has apparently done the legwork and homework that could permit him to write this story. This story is a unique sidebar in the administration's attempts to keep scandal at bay by insighting more scandal, the notorious mistake of presidents past and present. History will determine Clinton's legacy, this book furnishes one of its blemishes.
Review every book you read- authors deserve your opinions, not just elitist critics.

Poor Michael Isikoff couldn't get a job at the more presigious World Weakly News, instead Newsweek hired him at a bargain rate. And it shows in this boring, half witted book that was written for feebs.

Isikoff is able to pull off something unusual, not getting placed into the loop of "Bill-Haters". He tells the story with much facts and gives us an excellent view of the players in this drama (L. Tripp, M. Lewinsky, V. Jordan, R. Bennett, B. Clinton, P. Jones, B. Currie). I learned about the "vast conspiracy against WJC", but was disappointed in the lack of any info regarding Hillary. Obviously, she was tangental to the story, but it would have been nice. There was a earlier comment about Isikoff not taking an attorney to task over a blatent lie (Obviously not the first in this case). I would tend to be a bit more charitable: I think Isikoff had an error in judgement. I believe overall Isikoff acted with a great deal of integrity... Far more than you could say about the ex-president.

Although Isikoff is a bit overzealous, he does bring some shocking personality traits of Bill Clinton into light. "Uncovering Clinton" is told in story form and keeps you interested.

The fifth anniversary of the Monica Lewinsky scandal came and went without little media coverage or public reaction. People seem to have forgotten how the whole world briefly revolved around a blue dress and Newsweek reporter Michael Isikoff.

It is a safe bet Isikoff hasn't forgotten.

The title and author's name appear in equal size type along the spine of Uncovering Clinton/A Reporter's Story. This technical touch is an appropriate tribute to Isikoff's monumental ego. The reporter's megalomania is on display from the first page to the acknowledgements; one two-page footnote is dedicated to a relatively inconsequential detail that involves Iskoff. The journalist is pretty full of himself.

So why give such a vanity project three stars? The answer lies in the epilogue. The last pages of Uncovering Clinton probably best summarize the scandal and subsequent impeachment and acquittal of Clinton more than anything written at the time or since. One line about the press coverage, in particular, stands out:

"Sometimes the best stuff comes from the most unpleasant people."

Isikoff's summation is dead on.

Few heroes are to be found here. The "most unpleasant people" make the best sources, the best investigators, the best villians, the best liars, the best conspirators, and the best characters. New details emerge in these pages about Matt Drudge, Sidney Blumenthal, Lucianne Goldberg, Linda Tripp, Monica Lewinsky, Vernon Jordan and assorted others, but none are rehabilitated by the fresh information. President Clinton is oddly absent from most pages. Yet when Clinton does appear he is a dark and furtive figure.

Iskioff, apparently unwittingly, portrays himself as a reporter with an oversized ego and just enough grandiosity to see his work as always for the greater good. Oddly, Paula Jones comes across as a very sympathetic character. Isikoff finds a surprising degree of merit in Jones' sexual harassment lawsuit against Clinton. On the other hand, Isikoff's acceptance of Kathleen Willey's dubious tale throws this and other observations into some question. The Betty Currie the author portrays is potentially more culpable than she appeared. Without actually stating it, Isikoff's outrage at cyber-muckraker Drudge is an acknowledgement of the transition from the old era of the Establishment press to the Internet age of instant information. Drudge's scoops are a portent of things to come.

The book effectively is divided into three sections: the Jones lawsuit against the president, which started it all; the Willey accusation, which interjected Isikoff into the story; and the sexual scandal and subsequent cover-up that led to the president's impeachment. The author neatly ties them all together.

As the title indicates, this is a reporter's story. Neither scholarly nor shallow, Uncovering Clinton chronicles how one egotistical and dogged journalist covered, and in the process helped shape, a historic event that most people seem eager to forget. Given the sordid calamity Isikoff describes, the public reaction is understandable---and regrettable.

Her US presidential campaign for the 2008 election turned out to be a disaster for her, simply because a dark-horse (Barack Obama) ran much faster than she could. However, she will not give up her life dream. I am sure she is now gearing-up for the 2016 election where this "dark horse" would no longer run after the presumed successful two terms of his US presidency at White House. She could greatly contribute to his cabinet, serving as his VP (vice-president) or Secretary of State or Health with her great expertise. So I trust this 2008 book would be very useful for readers who would follow her foot steps beyond the 2008 election.

I found this book to be one of the best written about Hillary Clinton. Carl Bernstein gives a fair and unbiased view of the Senator of New York. It has helped me decide who I will voting for in the presidential election.

Hillary is hard to hate. She is also hard to take. We owe this author and now Mr. Obama for exposing Hillary more fully than we ever thought possible. By golly, she can't hide now. The primary season seems so prolonged and such a waste of money but in some weird way, it works. It shakes the candidates down, shakes them up, and shows them for who they really are. I have never been a fan, but I know that many admirers finally saw her for what she is. I happen to have some compassion and a little sympathy for her, but I can well see that our nation has been very lucky indeed to escape her projected presidency. Much is due to this biography, all well-known facts, but as collected here by an admirer, we see how clumsy and arrogant this woman really is. What an incompetent woman. Isn't it hilarious that she has tried to run as an experienced professional; here we see her as the ham-fisted bully she is.

Hillary Rodham Clinton's story is both fascinating and impressive. The fact that the renown journalist Carl Bernstein chose to write it, is telling. It's obvious in reading it that Bernstein is no fan of Hillary's, though he begrudgingly tries to portray her fairly. At times he is schizophrenic in his accusations and modest bits of back-handed praise.

O.K.,I'm pro-Hillary and Bernstein is not. This is no paen to the Senator-and-former-first-lady-who-would-be-President, but it is a worthwhile book because of its scope and because of the author's credentials.

Overall, A Woman in Charge is a good, if harsh biography of an amazing woman. The facts speak for themselves, and Hillary's intelligence, integrity, productivity and fortitude shine through.

I bought this book because, as a former strong supporter of the Clintons through all of their thicks and all of their thins, I was alarmed at how angry I am becoming now at their current behavior in the primaries.

It was described as "sympathetic," and I was hoping to find things there to admire in order to take a more moderate view of her and what seemed to me to be an almost pyschopathic campaign designed (at worst) to bring down the Party and or (even at best) to position herself to be the candidate in 2012 by destroying the man who might win in 2008.

That didn't happen. I became more frightened than I was before of what might occur if she is elected president.

There is instance after instance of REALLY bad judgment on her part (for example, when the 1994 loss of congress (considered to be partly due to the highhanded way she treated members of congress and others) forced her to back off from her role as Bill's main advisor, she turned the job over to (guess who?) DICK MORRIS.

And she threatened Bill Bradley and Pat Moynihan with dire consequences if they even dared to question her healthcare plan. Then, she refused promising-looking compromises with Republicans that might have given us at least some kind of viable plan. And we have gone almost a decade and a half now with NO PLAN. Bernstein makes a strong point about her refusals to compromise and her arrogance about her own positions being above criticism. Can we really afford 8 years of that.

The scariest part for me was the account of how she took charge of the "bimbo erruptions" by trying to paint Bill's mistresses as "stalkers" so as to dilute the possible effects of eye-witness accounts from people who had seen them together. It is hard for me to believe that feminists aren't disturbed by this bit of doberman-like behavior.

The book is very interesting as a case study of an ambitious flawed woman who has expoxied herself to the fortunes of an equally ambitious, equally flawed man.

But there was NOTHING in it that made me want to live throught 8 more years of wondering when the next shoe was going to drop and questioning how many of my doubts I would have to repress in order to defend them. Again.

This is a compelling expose' of the mob-like Clintons...both of 'em. You cannot believe the Clintons are so vindictive...they WILL do anything to get what they want. Read the book!!!!!!!!

This tell all book is well written and is very detailed of the author's experience with people of questionable character. It is an eye opener.

I borrowed this book from my grandmother. In my opinion, she and my grandfather are perfect examples of Tom Brokaw's Greatest Generation. While one doesn't have to ascribe to a certain political party to be considered "great," both my grandparents are very strong Republicans. They have confirmed to me that what Republicans stand for now aren't necessarily what has created such a strong Republican party in previous years. My grandparents moved to Arkansas before Clinton became governor, and they lived there through his governing years. I share this because I believe it is important for you to know my background in order to put my review in its proper light. That said, I heard from many people around my grandparents (who would also be considered the WWII generation) that though they might be Democrats, they were most definitely NOT Clinton supporters. I believe Clinton did not even carry Arkansas during his first presidential bid. This is important because Arkansas IS typically a Democratic southern state! Why would Arkansans NOT vote for Clinton?During his first run, my grandmother would say that Hillary was really the one in charge and that no one liked her and that to vote for Bill was really voting for Hillary...

Now,as a young voter, I saw Bill plead for himself during his impeachment trial when I was in college, but I didn't really "get it." Reading this book made me "get it." I finally understood what my grandma tried to tell me 15 years ago. I finally got why my gut feeling always seemed to tell me that Hillary was "off" somehow. Some of you might say, well, yeah, of course you would think that coming from a Republican family--but I even thought of voting for her this year in the primaries. I truly admire her determination, her strength, her focus...but something always felt uncomfortable; I can't name it--until I read this book. I knew Hillary would make a run for the presidency way before Clinton left office. I knew why she went to NY.I know why she runs now. She wants to win. She wants to show the world that a woman can play a man's game. But Willey helps me understand what Hillary looks like behind her facade, and it IS scary.

I gave this book only 3 stars because at the end Willey tries to ascertain why Bill and Hillary operate the way they do. I overanalyze everything, and I didn't really care to think about why they do what they do. I wanted more concrete information/documentation from others who see what Willey and others have seen from this couple. After reading this book, I found myself searching YouTube, Google for information to support Willey's perspective. I do believe that Willey has her own agenda and I am not sure what it is. I am not sure what prompted her to return to Clinton for a paying job when she filled in at various times for her husband's law firm. However, the bottom line is that I do believe Clinton assualted her, and I do believe his actions are more than just a president looking for some "action." Willey is very convincing of this, and for me, that is enough.

Thank you Kathleen for writing this book. I remember watching this obviously uncomfortable lady on TV and then reading and hearing the Clinton apologists and sycophants trash her at the time. But it was all part of the modus operandi of the Hillary and Bill team. We never knew your pain and how they terrorized you in your personal life until you wrote the book. I could not put it down, reading your documentation of how these career politicians abused their power and used powerful and rich friends to hire ex special ops goons to employ mafia like tactics against people who won't lie for them or serve their purpose anymore. Hillary and Bill will say and do anything to get back into the most powerful position in the US and thus reward their backers the second time around.

American doesn't need criminals and dynasties running this country.

Sign me: No more Clintons or Bushes in the White House

Yes I get why some people think she is lacking in credibility due to her ongoing communications with Clinton after the assault. But, if you read this carefully it's clear that Willey is just like that with everyone, Julia Steele, Linda Tripp & others who did her in. Willey still contacts them to wish them well during difficult times. It seems to me Willey is a classic co dependent & this behavior is completely consistent.

Willey doesn't really describe her late husband but extrapolating from his behavior, ie wildly overspending, keeping their finances secret from her & his eventual suicide certainly make a strong case that he was suffering some form of mental illness.

Again the codependent need to "make it right" or "fix it" is all over the place.

Dear nay sayers & Clintonistas I encourage you to study up on abused women & it will be excruciatingly clear that Willey's conduct after the assault is perfectly consisent & gives her credibility.