Clinton Books

Even though I had the chance to live through the years that Bill Clinton was president, I cannot believe how much of the Clinton years I had forgotten. Bill has a great sense of humor and is a great storyteller with compassion, grace and style. He is one of my favorite presidents of all time. A great read. It made me want to know more about his early years growing up in Arkansas.

As someone who has written a lot on Bill Clinton I eagerly awaited the release of his biography. It met most of my expectations although at times he put in far more than I needed to or cared to know. Nigel Hamilton does an excellent job in his early years biography and it matches most of what Clinton talks about here. The need for Bill Clinton to please everyone around him really comes out in his own biography and while I feel he skirts around his disagreement with Carter and does not express the anger that most sources say he felt it is a very honest attempt. I would have liked more details about his college years and meeting Hillary which he jumps past fairly quickly and gets into their political relationship. It is very well written which is to be expected from someone as educated as Bill Clinton.

As I said to my fellow authors earlier, Bill's one of us. He's a writer. This isn't about agreeing with his politics, by the way. It's about, as the book title implies, his life. Which, as luck would have it, does feature a whole lot of politics. I can picture professors building courses around this book, and I think that'is probably a good thing. In China we use FORREST GUMP, which is quite good, but in the US let's go for the gold. MY LIFE goes way below the surface.

Bill Clinton has an amazing memory, in addition to detailed notes and journals and such, and he takes us on a very candid journey. It's almost like being an imbedded journalist. We start with a country boy and many southern tales, then move through some "small town hick in the big city" tales that include Oxford and the soul-searching of the Vietnam War years, then finally through his lengthy political career, one year at a time. Campaigns for others, then for himself. A lot of politics when he's in office.

Politics doesn't simply bore me. I find them downright painful. But I must admit that I've wondered where presidents come from. When I was a little boy, I wanted to be a writer, a teacher or perhaps a cop. Or an NFL quarterback, but I realized early on that might be a tad unrealistic. But president? It never occurred to me. Why did it occur to the poor bumbling fat kid from Arkansas? Read his book and you'll know the answer.

I admire anyone who can pull together a wide variety of seemingly contradictory influences into a consistent whole. You've seen me try to do it in this newsletter, and you can see Bill Clinton do it in this book. Those who equate "thinking" with "waffling" just don't get it. Quite probably they quit subscribing to THIS rag ages ago, if they ever found it at all. So I don't write for them. I write for you.

I'm reaching the age where it's getting very hard to find a non-fiction writer older than me writing about events that I find interesting. Bill qualifies. It's very good to watch history unfold through his eyes. The events I lived through and remember, the ones that preceded those, the ones I just plain missed because I was too busy with other things. One of life's little ironies is that I missed some of Bill's efforts to unburden the lower class because I was too busy shouldering that burden.

This is a 957-page monster, folks. It's a big-un, and it's largely narrative. I've been at it for maybe two weeks. There's no law saying you can't take longer. Stop to read something else, come back to it later, whatever. I'm glad I'm reading it. I think you will be too. (It helps to be American.) Heck, I think you already have read it and I'm just preaching to the choir over here. But hey, Mikey likes it.

I like a story that takes its time and give me the details to make my own conclusions and that is just what Bill Clinton has done with his book. I didn't vote for him either time he ran for national office and I still enjoyed this book.

Okay, so the man didn't exactly need redeeming in my eyes. I thought him a kind of hero before I picked up this book and think of him that way still, though now I have better reasons for it than his public humility, esteem on the world stage, and deft financing of public schools across the country. In his biography, Clinton plies his stock-in-trade, or better, his skill in spades, charm, to his life, both private and political, early and late. When was the last time a public figure acted with such transparency regarding his motives, failures, and frustrations? If he is guilty here of recasting his life favorably, as most biographers eventually are, it is not the usual kind of favoritism that has a large figure becoming mythic, larger-than-life. It is rather that he is uber-authentic, having been born of an alcoholic dad, and living aside an estranged and drug-addicted brother; these snapshots tend to emphasize his claim to the title "the nation's first black president," a street kid who made good through excessive pulling of bootstraps. Larger-than-life is precisely what Clinton is not in this story, but endearingly and precisely life-sized.

At the time of its hardcover release - 1996 - David Brock was the top-gun reporter for The American Spectator, writing several exposes on Anita Hill & Bill Clinton and penning a best-selling 1993 book, The Real Anita Hill.

With a dour photo of Hillary Rodham gracing the front cover of the hardcover edition - a la Hill's picture on the less-than-flattering biography - it appeared at first glance that Brock was positioned to attack the then First Lady through new revelations and late-breaking angles.

In this case, the picture is quite deceptive, as Brock writes a straight-forward unauthorized biography of Rodham, where journalism pushes sensationalism into the gutter, with a focus on the core values which led her into the political arena before her marriage to Bill Clinton.

Brock depicts Rodham coming of age in the 1960s, growing up in a conservatative suburb of Chicago, Illinois, having an early education in Republican politics. Her political conversion can be summed up in a line from her 1969 Wellesley College commencement address: "And the challenge now is to practice politics as the art of making what appears to be impossible, possible."

What appeared to be a fast-track to a career in politics - after a stint as a staffer on the House Committee on the Judiciary during the Watergate investigation - Rodham abandons this quest, marries Clinton and moves to Arkansas. Brock meticulously moves through this period of professional triumph, setbacks and personal anguish within a rocky partnership caused by Clnton's peccadilloes.

By striding past banner headlines and finger-pointing accusations, Brock shows a profile in courage due to following the whims of the heart, which is a timeless tale.

David Brock's Seduction is a great read, and it will be curious to see this work rise on AMAZON's sales list now that Hillary has lifted her skirts for a run to the White House (watch those cankles!).

Brock's Seduction of Hillary Rodham will satisfy no one on the tails of the normal distribution of those with an opinion of Hillary Rodham Clinton (HRM HRC).

Which makes it a surprisingly honest book, but one that mostly lays the blame of her political development on the round heals of her opportunistic and amoral husband.

Still, Brock's prose packs a punch, and his journalism alternates between thorough and tedious to sloppy and careworn. Errors a plenty, but about evenly divided into the camp of ones that hurt HRC and ones that help her, so no prize on elevating one error over the other to prove an ideological point on the one-upmanship game.

This book was originally commissioned by The American Spectator and offered as a subscription renewal premium, so it would be fair to anticipate that there might be a slant or agenda attached. Yet delivery of Seduction was delayed for a good while, both from Brock's missing deadlines, and the ultimate lukewarm conclusion the book comes to about HRC: she's not the devil incarnate, nor particularly great, nor hopelessly Lady Macbeth, but rather an intelligent ambitious pol of the old entitlement school of rule and divide spoils. The editors of The AmSpec were probably not amused, but by then articles were appearing about Brock's private life and journalistic techniques in The Washington Post. The book disappointed everyone, and eventually Brock was given the heave-ho from AmSpec (deserved) but well remembered and thanked for his great book The Real Anita Hill (also deserved).

The two weakest areas are Hilary's handling of Federally subpoenaed documents for the Whitewater investigation (she hid and suppressed them is about the only logical conclusion you could come to) and her amazing 10 sigma event of earning 1000% returns on cattle futures glancing at headlines in the Wall Street Journal (I have a bridge to sell you, comes with the Eiffel Tower). But neither Hilary haters nor Hilary defenders (she doesn't need them) will be happy with this book.

David Brock's Seduction is a great read, and it will be curious to see this work rise on AMAZON's sales list now that Hillary has lifted her skirts for a run to the White House (watch those cankles!).

Brock's Seduction of Hillary Rodham will satisfy no one on the tails of the normal distribution of those with an opinion of Hillary Rodham Clinton (HRM HRC).

Which makes it a surprisingly honest book, but one that mostly lays the blame of her political development on the round heals of her opportunistic and amoral husband.

Still, Brock's prose packs a punch, and his journalism alternates between thorough and tedious to sloppy and careworn. Errors a plenty, but about evenly divided into the camp of ones that hurt HRC and ones that help her, so no prize on elevating one error over the other to prove an ideological point on the one-upmanship game.

This book was originally commissioned by The American Spectator and offered as a subscription renewal premium, so it would be fair to anticipate that there might be a slant or agenda attached. Yet delivery of Seduction was delayed for a good while, both from Brock's missing deadlines, and the ultimate lukewarm conclusion the book comes to about HRC: she's not the devil incarnate, nor particularly great, nor hopelessly Lady Macbeth, but rather an intelligent ambitious pol of the old entitlement school of rule and divide spoils. The editors of The AmSpec were probably not amused, but by then articles were appearing about Brock's private life and journalistic techniques in The Washington Post. The book disappointed everyone, and eventually Brock was given the heave-ho from AmSpec (deserved) but well remembered and thanked for his great book The Real Anita Hill (also deserved).

The two weakest areas are Hilary's handling of Federally subpoenaed documents for the Whitewater investigation (she hid and suppressed them is about the only logical conclusion you could come to) and her amazing 10 sigma event of earning 1000% returns on cattle futures glancing at headlines in the Wall Street Journal (I have a bridge to sell you, comes with the Eiffel Tower). But neither Hilary haters nor Hilary defenders (she doesn't need them) will be happy with this book.

Almost ten years have passed since the publication of this book. From before then and until recently, David Brock has appeared now and again on C-SPAN's "Washington Journal," during which time he moved from the right to the left on the political spectrum, eventuating in his disavowal of the right-wing attack machine in which he had played such an important part. Compelled by a sudden interest in Hillary Rodham because of her possible run for president, I selected THIS book to educate myself on her because it was during the research and writing of it that Brock turned away from the dark side of the force. Something about her inspired him to take a political one-eighty, so one would assume that he shared in this book something of what it was that brought him to such illumination. I remember when it was released, right wingers were furious to learn that their heretofore reliable hitman hadn't delivered the magic bullet that would put an end to the Clintons, and Hillary in particular. Instead, Brock presented a detailed account of the influences that drive Hillary Rodham, and to a liberal's delight and a right winger's disdain, she's basically a deeply spiritual person, with her ideology steeped in Christianity, the type known as social gospel activism. It's hard to take the moral high ground in opposing her after these submissions, and you'll have to find something else to hate her for besides your affected righteous indignation.

The book focuses primarily on her moral influences, and shows how they consistently affected her. She had always been personally conservative, despite the influences of the campuses she attended in the 60s, shunning the libertinism, refraining from drugs, and remaining relatively chaste; politically she rejected the destructive anti-establishment revolutionary thinking preached by the harder activists. Her activism lay in the belief in making change within the system by altering how the law is viewed. It was all very fascinating stuff, and the reader will learn to split a hair or two.

What some readers in some of these reviews possibly objected to was the way Brock mentioned some of the rumors -- gossip, mostly from her detractors, alleging lesbianism or an affair with Vince Foster; the gossipers should make up their minds -- but these stories had to be discussed if the book was to have any credibility at all. Brock inserted some incredulity into the comments by putting them in the context of hardball politics played by her husband's political enemies, jealous backbiters, and sometimes just plain old Arkansas male chauvinism. When Hillary moved with Bill back to his home state, she didn't deal graciously with a male-dominated political system that resented strong women. Some of Bill's closest friends panned her. Her strenghts made them feel weak. From what I gleaned, she was committed to intelligence itself as a tool, as a gift, and as such, regarded it as an asset she was sure principled people would appreciate. This was not the case, as most people's agendas were less noble than her own. Eventually, she learned to play the political game, to take on APPEARANCES, using tactics every politician on Capital Hill uses every day, and, as in everything else she sets her mind to, she excelled in it. Lacking her practicality and her commitment to her long-range goals, some people were harshly critical of her, accused her of selling out. The truth is, she detested the political games even as she played them -- preferring instead entreaties to reason -- but she brushed aside her objections for what she felt was a greater good, the use of her gifts to make positive changes in society.

More instructional to the reader is the detailed accounting of the scandals that had eclipsed everything and anything else about the Clintons. The tableu that had played out via hundreds of insinuating soundbites was revealed as just a shadow play. The financial scandals were too complicated to be appreciated through snatches of news, and Brock here lays them out in detail, connects the dots, forming a cohesive story, and you realize that a lot was made of nothing, that the whole fiasco resulted from machinations of a partisan political system, polemics gone wild. He doesn't explicitly say so here in this book, as he does in a later one, but that is indeed the case.

Overall, it's a good read. Only one part was boring, an interminably long description of how people were selected for President Clinton's cabinet, a tedious detailing of the relationships Hillary relied upon to establish control. This is only a minor point. Most of the time, he moves along. Brock's criticisms were always accompanied with a mitigating point, describing Hillary in the context of a political food chain. And while Brock's criticisms seemed harsher toward the end of the book, the rest of it betrays his very high regard for her.

And why wouldn't he have a high regard? She possesses a moral conviction to advance society for everyone's benefit, and a superior intelligence at her disposal to aid her in accomplishing it, qualities that would add up to greatness in any other politician. Brock's main detraction is how Hillary dealt with a hostile poltical environment, that her education and her values inhered in her a more principled approach, one based on moral arguments she might deliver in a courtroom, and this worked to her detriment in the final analysis. But she's unable to set the rules, and thereby forced to play by them as they are. That's a small detraction in my estimation. By the time I had turned the last page, I had come to see her in an entirely new light, as one fine human being with only minor character flaws. I recommend this book to anyone interested in a clearer picture of her.

On the other hand, to the rabid Clinton bashers, I say this: Don't bother, as YOU won't get much out of it; it is simply not spiteful enough.

In page after page of "facts" based on assumptions, presumptions, and lies, he produces a tale of flimsy accusations of improperity against a woman who is much brighter, quicker, and kinder than her male counterparts. It was easily apparent that he manufactured much of the "facts."

`The American Leadership Tradition' is a hard-hitting, behind-the-scenes look at some of our greatest leaders. I admired Marvin's Olasky's clear, unvarnished view, but retained the right to disagree with some of what he says. His view is that when the president is morally flawed, there are negative consequences. My view is that God can and does work through flawed people, including you and me and everyone else, or we might not even be here to talk about it. There are plenty of examples of this in the Bible; see the story of Joseph in Genesis who was sold into slavery in Egypt for the eventual salvation of Israel.

The first president I voted for was JFK who was seen as a shining light whose only drawback, in the public perception, was that he was Catholic, which was no drawback for me at the time since I was also Catholic. He promised that Catholicism would not affect his stances on issues like birth-control, that he would serve the electorate regardless of his faith, which he did (but because he apparently had no faith). This book gives a sharply different view of Kennedy, saying he was a tireless adulterer, who was as short-sighted and quick in his decision-making as he was in performing sex. Although he was brilliant at times, like in the Cuban Missile Crises, some of his pragmatic decisions had long-lasting, adverse affects, as in the Vietnam War and our relations with Cuba.

According to Olasky, some other presidents like George Washington, Andrew Jackson, and TR were admirable types who diligently tried to follow their faith and its biblical principals. Lincoln was less admirable because he was not as mature in his following of his faith. Presidents like Bill Clinton and Thomas Jefferson are portrayed as out-and-out hypocrites, showing the public their best side, and acting out their sin nature behind the scenes.

I would challenge the author about the performance of Lincoln, whom I still think is clearly our greatest president, and FDR, who despite his moral laxity, was able to masterfully steer us through the Depression and WWII.

In short, I appreciated Marvin Olasky's clear stand on each of the subjects of his book because it gives you a lot to think about, even though I disagreed with some of his conclusions.

religous zealot with an agenda. This is still pretty entertaining writing. I love revisionist history. Just don't swallow Mr. Olasky whole. His lack of footnoes or attribution didn't really occur to me. I listened to the unabridged audio cassette version.
Mr. Olasky seems to suffer from terminal self righteousness & condemns those who have a problem with the seventh commandment: when it suits him. He also has a problem with leaders who don't genaflect to "God" every time they open their mouths. After the first 1,000 times I heard, "God Bless the United States", I felt like saying "enough already". Apparently slavery, genocide of a people (Jackson) & unbridled greed (Rockefeller) are qualities we should admire as long as God is invoked at regular intervals. Washington & Lincoln are good despite the fact that Washington was a slave owner & really did like to dance with the ladies. That's okay. Both men are national icons. He rips Thomas Jefferson a new one. T.J.also had slaves, but what bothered Mr.Olasky most was he slept with woman. He was single, (widowed actually) unlike Washington. However, Jefferson did not invoke God constantly & probably was an atheist. Grover Cleveland a good man & president, fathered a child out of wedlock. He stays in Olasky good graces by his generously mentioning the almighty in his speeches.
If you can master it, compartmentalization is a very useful skill for leaders who have a weakness for sex. FDR was a moral relativist. JFK is shoveling in the fires of eternal damnation, despite his bad back. Clinton may join him some day if you believe in a physical hell, that it sounds like Mr. Olasky believes in. Where time & money are wasted on moral issues is that Congress dances when ever the media whistles. The impeachment of Bill Clinton was proof of that. More recently the baseball steroids scandal wasted time & money. Terry Schiavo was not allowed to die in dignity. But it is a Republican Congress & President. They probably have nothing better to do.

"What makes a leader truly great?" [reads the back jacket of this book...] "Is it simply a matter of management style or personality?"

No, answers the author -- it is simply a matter of being a good Christian. But what is a good Christian? Why, that is simply someone who believes exactly as Marvin Olasky believes. It's just that simple...

unfortunately, the book also irritated me, and I have never been called a liberal by anyone. While I appreciated Olasky's assertion that private morals DO matter in public office, I thought his approach was simplistic and narrow. If one takes Olasky's arguments to their logical conclusion, one would have to say that there aren't too many people in the history of humankind who have adopted the correct religious view. Olasky's version of heaven is going to be quite thinly populated I suspect...Jefferson, who was a founding father of our republic and doubled its size while in office, is portrayed as a godless, snobby, scheming, screw-up. Jackson, a violent man who defied the Supreme Court and signed the death warrant for thousands of civilized Cherokees seeking legal redress, is portrayed as your favorite god-fearing uncle. I suppose the battalions of left-wing revisionists brought this sort of book upon themselves in a way, but sometimes I just wish the pendulum could settle in the middle for a while. History should be about getting at the TRUTH, not supporting your pet argument at all costs.

Conclusion: the less thoughtful among the fundamentalist Christians will find fodder for their arguments here and will save having to read all the real history in the bargain. The Clinton-esque liberals will bust veins in the heads over this outrage. The true historians will quietly shake their heads and toss this book aside.

This book discussed the inter-relation of the private and public life of our elected officials. Of course, this could have a broader application (business, religion, etc). I was impressed with the honesty that Olasky exhibited by not sugar coating the short-comings of some of our greatest American heroes. He also discussed their strengths, victories and missed opportunities. Anyone aspiring to public office, or any leadership position, owes it to themself to get this book and devour it. You will be better for having read it.

Even though I am an evangelical Christian (as is Olasky) After having read several of the brief biographies in this book, I'm not so sure if factual accuracy was the author's intent, or selective presentation of history in order to make a point.

For instance, Olasky makes a favorable presentation of George Washington as, ostensibly, a Christian motivated by a concern for the will of God, but never once does Olasky mention GW's well-documented progress up through Freemasonry. Which God did Washington concern himself with?

The chapter on Andrew Jackson was interesting, but, having no background with Jackson's history, I can not comment.

On the flip side, I have studied Abraham Lincoln's life extensively, and was entirely befuddled by Olasky's presentation of him. Lincoln soliciting a prostitute as a young man? That's one I've never heard before, even from the modern revisionist biographers. Olasky, presenting unfavorable information about Lincoln, draws heavily on Herndon's (much criticised) biography of Lincoln, even though Herndon had effectively no contact with Lincoln after he became President. Where is Sandburg's biography in Olasky's bibliography? Finally, in order to solidify his view of Lincoln as a mean-spirited man driven by God to exact revenge on the South, Olasky excerpts a section of Lincoln's (comparatively short) Second Inaugural, choosing not to quote the parts of that very same speech that present a competing view.

One last point. While Olasky includes a bibliography for each chapter of his book, there are no footnotes, making it very difficult to check the accuracy of his claims.

Read this book with caution; consider it "semi-fiction".

Dylan fans love to read about the recording sessions; especially the songs left off the original albums, and this book gives the relevant and fascinating information wanted...a well written book by an unashamed fan.

Heylin's study of Dylan's recording sessions starts in 1960 with the period immediately preceding his signing with Columbia and ends in 1993 with World Gone Wrong (clearly an update is needed). Each chapter, starting with a sessionography, is dedicated to one of Dylan's official studio releases. Four chapters cover sessions that did not lead to official releases and one chapter is dedicated to soundtrack and tribute recordings Dylan contributed to. An appendix listing bootlegs that might have been available at the time of the book's release closes the book.

Heylin is wonderfully opinionated and uses each chapter to highlight the merits and flaws of the released and unreleased content of each album. To his credit, and unlike many who write about Dylan, Heylin is not afraid to separate the dross from the gold. He clearly has a problem with the way Dylan's art has been made available to his fans (the book is amusingly "NOT dedicated to Jeff Rosen," the man responsible for overseeing Columbia's vast archives of Dylan's work). Reading the book both provides a glimpse into what Dylan's official oeuvre might have been and serves as a guide for collectors of unofficial recordings in determining what is worth seeking out.

You might not agree with all of Heylin's opinions, but if you're a Dylan fan, this is essential reading.

If, like me, you want to know as much as you can about Dylan's recordings, you have to get a copy of this. But that means reading endless badly-written diatribes against Dylan and whomever else Heylin dislikes. Apparently, it's okay for Heylin to prefer the original "Blood on the Tracks" recordings, but for Greil Marcus to prefer the acoustic "Blind Willie McTell" is, to quote Heylin, "wrong."

Clinton Heylin, one of the leading writers on Bob Dylan (and author of, perhaps, the best biography on the man, Behind The Shades), deserves kudos for the exhausting amount of research he put into this book and the information he has presented. It is essential for obsessive Bob Dylan fans - is there any other kind? - who must have every little tidbit of information about the man and what he did in the studio. It is particulary interesting for collectors as it goes into detail about the many, many songs Dylan has recorded throughout the years and not released. It is a chronicle of absolutely everything that Dylan put to tape between the 1960 recordings made in the apartments of friends when he was still in college up to his Good As I Been To You album, as well as soundtracks and appearance on the albums of others, where relevant. Heylin includes not only a list of every song, but also the different takes, and shows what songs are circulating among collectors and which ones still have not seen the light of day. He also includes other relevant information such as what musicians played on the sessions, as well as several appendices such as a list of Dylan compositions, covers he has recorded, and even the session charts from the Desire sessions. The only thing that brings the book down is Heylin's own constant interjected commentary. It is unfortunate that seemingly every commentator on Dylan seems to see it as their duty to critize certain aspects of the man's work and say what he should have done differently - as if they had any right to question the genius of the greatest songwriter of the 20th century. Certainly, Heylin is entitled to his opinion, and never does he make the claim that this book is entirely objective, but, at times, it happens so often as to get in the way. Still, for the true Dylan fan, this book is still a must-have for the priceless information it gives. Casual fans need not bother.

I must give it to Mr Heylin. He appears to have a wealth of knowledge concerning Bob Dylan. In this book he lays out that knowledge in a straight-forward, understandable way. Had he stopped there this would be a great book filled with insight. As it is, the book is worthy of 3 stars only because the topic is good.

I found it tiresome to have to slough through Mr Heylin's personal comments (often in parenthesis) that gave no value to the book. In fact, I found these comments so regular to be distracting to the subject. I found myself frustrated by Mr Heylin's constant interjection of himself into the book. Often, they transformed a behind the scenes look at the recording life of Bob Dylan into a discussion of what Bob Dylan should have done to create a better work.

Certainly, Mr Heylin's opinion can be well thought out. Certainly, he has a right to his opinion. I was just disappointed that he constantly hid his opinion among good discussions relating to the recording life and style of one of music's most influence songwriters.

(Not to mention, Mr Heylin's constant use of bazaar names for "Mr. D".)

its not easy being conspiratorial. But when it comes to Mena, just ask yourself: why is it that BCCI Bank, a global bank, winds up with a jerkwater Arkansas law firm by the name of Rose Law Firm? Were Henry Kissinger and William Colby just driving through Arkansas one day and picked Vince and Hillary on pure happenstance. If they didn't, what else does one conclude? Mena helps explain why justice never gets done in Washington. There is a darker side to this two party system that no one wants to look at. I dare ya.

I read this book and watched the video as well and they leave no doubt about the corruption that Ken Starr was going after Bill Clinton for. Bill Clinton used a famous pastor of my Barrington Illinois church as one of his spiritual advisors and did so because he was well respected and seeing him would make Clinton look like a respectable bible believing moral Christian. He even came and spoke at our church once and had the membership furious. History shows the result of my pastor wasting his valuable time on Clinton. What an embarrassment. If you read this book with an open mind and view all the evidence it presents there is no doubt how corrupt our 2 party system is and how corrupt all our government is to let him off. You will be amased at the corruption that started when Clinton was Attorney General then Governor of Arkansas. Read "Sell Out" written by a Chicago lawyer "David P. Shippers" hired by Henry Hyde to perform an independent investigation of the info Ken Starr was presenting. This book shows how Bill Clinton and Al Gore mis-used their power to steal elections with illegal immigration and explains in detail along with White House emails why all eyes were on Florida in the last election. It also details how our government sold out the American Public and set Bill Clinton free to save our country and several other politicians from embarassment. When the info was gathered Shippers presented it to all the members of the House and they voted to impeach, however when he attempted to present the evidence at the Senate, not one Domecrat and several Republicans would look at the evidence and they voted not to impeach. Also go to www.counterclintonlibrary.com and read the list of Clinton friends and allies who are no longer with us. I don't know about you but I never met anyone who lost so many friends in 8 to 10 years who all had information that could have put Bill clinton in prison.

You people who buy into this nonsense are truly, truly sad.. I don't get angry or even try to dispute this stuff anymore. If you were capable of any shred of open minded argument based on fact and evidence you wouldn't be in this situation. Let history judge Bill Clinton, and his detractors. We will see who looks foolish.

This book is actually an anthology of writings by a series of people who claim to know the real Bill and Hillary Clinton. The writers of these articles are: a former Arkansas Supreme Court judge, a retired military officer who examines the reasons why Bill Clinton is a terrible Commander-in-Chief of our nation's military apparatus, as well as a few others, such as the son of Jerry Parks. Jerry was assassinated, apparently to prevent information damaging to Bill Clinton from seeing the light of day. The book is the written record of the Clinton Chronicles video tape, which made waves early in the Clinton administration, and which Amazon.com carries for a pretty reasonable price. I should mention that I haven't seen the video tape, but decided to read the book instead.

This is pretty standard fare for the anti-Clinton brigade. We are shown the usual portrait of Bill Clinton; the draft dodging, the financial scams involving Don Tyson, the infamous Mena drug trafficking scam, the Jerry Parks assassination, the cocaine addiction, and the Dan Lasater connection. Probably the best part of the book, as well as the longest article, is the one that shows why Bill Clinton is unfit to be the head of our nation's military. In this article we see how Clinton pulled every string in the book to avoid serving in Vietnam, which includes his famous letter to his draft board. We also find out that Clinton took a trip behind the Iron Curtain, and even went to Moscow. The details of what happened during this trip are shrouded in mystery, but it is pointed out that this trip alone would be enough to deny anyone a security clearance. Since Clinton is the chief executive, he is immune to the checks that would block a security clearance. We also see Clinton's foreign policy blunders in Haiti and Somalia. The Somalia fiasco cost American lives, since Clinton officials insisted that the Rangers involved in the operation sholdn't have armored carriers or tanks as back-up. Clinton and his touchy-feely administrators apparently didn't want any Somali people to get shot. These critiques are devastating and are appropriate accusations that should have been raised. The media is too busy to raise these questions, as they spend most of their time standing around gazing at the Clinton family with stars in their eyes.

An average book, but necessary for those who are examining the Clinton regime, and want to understand how one man has caused so much damage to our country. It also reveals some nice tidbits. Did you know that Clinton never finished his Rhodes scholarship? He didn't. So much for Mr. Intellectual, I guess.

This book is to books what "Plan Nine from Outer Space" is to movies. Turn to page 132 and look carefully between the fifth and sixth lines from the top. You'll see a message, in very small, very faint type.

It says, "You are a doofus."

For someone who has little understanding of cultural tension, this book is extremely well-written and helps reader empathize with situations in the middle east.

This "novel" is thinly veiled propaganda, pure and simple. It is a shame that this type of "literature" is aimed at such a young and impressionable audience. This book was part of my child's public school cirriculum, and while it does attempt to illustrate that violence is no solution to the Middle East conflict, it is quite obvious where the author's sensitivities lie. This was a major disappointment, I would not feel comfortable recommending this book to others.

Eleven-year-old Malaak has stopped talking to her family and friends since her father disappeared a month before. The roof of her building in the Palestinian community of Gaza City provides her only refuge. It is here that she speaks to her pet dove Abdo, a gift from her father. In this place, she says, "I soar out of the Gaza Strip. Nothing stops me, not the concrete and razor wire, not the guns, not the soldiers." It is the first intifada of 1988 and Malaak experiences the mounting conflict between the Palestinians and the Israelis.

When Malaak learns that her father was killed on a bus by a terrorist's bomb, she retreats to an inner world where she sees her father in dreams. All around her the violence increases as the youth on the streets or the "shabab" take on the Israeli soldiers with stones for weapons. Malaak's mother and her sister Hend, decry the violence of the Islamic Jihad. However, her 12-year-old brother Hamid is drawn in by its angry self-righteousness. Malaak loves her brother, her protector and a poet, but is scared to see him move increasingly under the influence of others in the jihad, who embrace violence as a solution to the occupation of the Gaza Strip.

The power of A Stone in My Hand is its insightful portrayal of the scars left on those children living in a zone of armed conflict and unending violence. From the silencing of Malaak by grief, to the rash and dangerous decisions of Hamid, we see children living in a world out of their control, coping in ways that are more instinctual than rational. The damage made by the ravages of armed violence is evident. However, for Malaak, the love of her family and the memory of her father is the balm to soothe the wounds.

Eleven-year-old Malaak has stopped talking to her family and friends since her father disappeared a month ago. She spends most of her time on the roof of her building in the Palestinian community of Gaza City. In this refuge, she speaks to her dove Abdo, a gift from her father. In this place, she says, "I soar out of the Gaza Strip. Nothing stops me, not the concrete and razor wire, not the guns, not the soldiers." It is the first intifada of 1988 and Malaak is experiencing the mounting armed conflict between the Palestinians and the Israelis.

When Malaak learns that her father was killed on a bus by a terrorist's bomb, she retreats into an inner world where she sees her father in dreams. All around her, however, the violence increases between the Palestinian youth or "shabab" and the Israeli soldiers. Malaak's mother and her sister Hend decry the violence of Islamic Jihad whom they hold responsible for their father's death. Hamid, Malaak's 12-year-old brother is increasingly drawn in by its angry and uncompromising righteousness. Malaak loves her brother, her protector and a poet, but is scared to see him move increasingly under the influence of others who embrace violence as the solution to the occupation of the Gaza Strip.

The power of A Stone in My Hand is its insightful portrayal of the scars left on those children living in a zone of armed conflict and unending violence. From the silencing of Malaak by grief, to the rash, dangerous decisions of Hamid, we see children living in a world out of their control, coping in ways that are more instinctual than rational. The scars left by the ravages of armed violence are evident. However, for Malaak, the love of her family and the memory of her father provide the balm to soothe her wounds.

Eleven year-old Malaak Abed Atieh lives with her mother, her older sister Hend and her older brother Hamid in Gaza City. It's been a month since their father left to look for work as a mechanic in Israel, only to disappear. Every day she climbs up to the roof and waits for him, imagining that she can fly to the prison cell where she is convinced he's being held. She hardly speaks to anybody except her pet bird Abdo.

As tensions mount between the Israelis and Palestinians, Malaak realizes she can't remain in her world of silence anymore. Each day becomes a struggle for her when her mother tells her that her father is dead. It gets even harder when Hamid tells her that he and his friend, Tariq, have become involved in a hate group. When the rest of the family finds out, they know he's in danger and try to get him out of the hate group with no success. Their worst fears are realized when Hamid gets shot in the head one day and has to go to the hospital. Will Hamid remain alive or will he die like his father?

This book made me feel sorry for all of the people who are experiencing war in their home countries. Nobody should have to go through that kind of turmoil in their lives. If I were Hamid, I would not have joined the hate group because violence does not solve problems. What would you have done if you were Hamid? If you like to read moving stories, read this book to find out what happens to Malaak and her family.

--- Reviewed by Ashley Hartlaub

I'm glad I still have a copy of THE DYSFUNCTIONAL PRESIDENT by Paul Fick, Ph.D. It makes it much easier for me to believe that we are currently being ruled by the children of the people who killed President Kennedy. Living like we have a Pearl Harbor in September and a Pearl Harbor in December is a constant reminder that governments seem to be the first group likely to act on the feeling that Americans have far too much freedom, which might allow something else terrible to happen if we don't maintain air superiority over the highly organized countries in the world as well as in those places where chaos prevents the duly elected officials from protecting mixed neighborhoods full of people who would like to kill each other.

Psychology has managed to produce some destructive frames of reference, and the idea that children adapt to ways of coping which tend to stand in the way of any obvious solutions to problems that we all face: there you have it. We can't all just sit back and fick the world whenever we need to find our bearings, but people with Ph.D.s are rapidly running out of viable alternatives to figuring out the entertainment value of everything. This book is unlikely to become popular again, but something which is so dated might become a model for a new look at the fabulous Senator Clinton who is in the race for president in 2008 to win. The boy/girl dichotomy has already produced numerous summations of the tensions that people usually face, talk about, and sometimes even turn into jokes or popular songs. When it turns into politics, though, we are talking about something unbelievably ugly.

I was an early reader of this book, and I spent several years of addiction to my dislike for its contents. Such a world we live in~this book is the standard by which people determine what is normal, and I find that I must be the most spaced out poet on the planet to want to render my own judgment:

You and Fick~what a stitch,

what a stitch!

Psychologically sick,

Intellectually rich.

The basis for my inappropriate laughter on this attempt to straight-lace the most modern of presidents is the strangeness of the thought which forms the basis for this book~suppose that the American body politic is a woman. The stitch which makes Fick's book seem most unseamly on this question might be to an author, Kelly Oliver, of a book on philosophy's relation to the "feminine." I consider Oliver my main guide to this realm of intellectual intoxication, possibly more reliable on the knowledge of these things than democracy has proved suitable as a system for governing people who disagree more on who has to follow certain rules than on anything else. I have read one book by Oliver, but I read it in such a way, with a deep and modernly theological background in the world which she attempts to describe, that I might claim to know her subject better than she does herself merely by calling attention to a line on page 16 of her book. "Like the fetishist, Freud has it both ways." We are not arranging a psychological heavyweight championship fight here, Freud to Fick, with Kelly Oliver as the mother who tells them when to break it up because this isn't fair, Freud was a real doctor or something. Actually, Oliver thought, "For Freud there is nothing more frightening than the thought of being buried alive," and he isn't likely to be by any book by Paul M. Fick.

I thought this work would give me some insight to the minds of persons who hold positions of power, sadly it did not. Though I am not skeptical about psychology, I find too many persons fashioning themselves experts when they learn only elements of diagnosis. Fick would have us think that he can analyze an individual from meida reports; though it may be fun it is dangerous, destructive and unprofessional.

It is unprofessional and ridiculous that a writer would attempt a book as this one and claim "professionalism." Although Fick did put in his disclaimer that he never saw "the patient;" he failed to disclose that his real purpose in writing The Dysfunctional President was to make money selling the book.

The former president certainly disappointed us, but more disappointing was the highly educated American People letting themselves be swept away emotionally in a media morality play. Fick, playing up to this, saw a way to make money while public interest in the whole affair has been waning.

I found the book presenting misguided aspects of the Diagnostic and Statistics Manual. All too often, these played with by folk playing "blaming others." In Fick's writing, out of context descriptions of human behavior filled the pages of a book that purports to educate. The work reads as the verbiage of "failed twelve-steppers,"while giving energy to detractors of Bill Clinton. This kind of analysis is really masturbating on a mental plane opposite that on an official plane. Sorry Fick, though I read your writing, I didn't buy it or buy into it. Your work only encourages people Clinton haters and those who imagine themselves expert in a serious profession that should be left to serious professionals.

This book, or better yet, the revised version, is a must read for every American. Get a look inside the man we elected twice. Dr. Fick's analysis of Clinton as the "Adult Child of an Alcoholic" sheds light on the apparently erractic behavior of our president.

The most satisfying part of the book for me was learning that Clinton's problems are not the result of some "vast right-wing conspiracy". Rather, they are manifestations of Clinton's unresolved childhood problems.

Read this book and you'll be able to make sense of the chaos Clinton creates. One thing is for sure -- it'll take a while to restore the credibility and dignity of the office of president after Clinton leaves, such is the damage done.

As a rule, I am scornful of books that attempt to psychoanalyze public figures from afar; indeed, I am skeptical about psychology in general. In this case, the author himself points out that his analysis should only be taken so seriously considering he has never seen the `patient'. I am also dubious about the notion of `syndromes' in general. Certainly Bill is a liar and a vacillator who denies personal responsibility, but are these traits really caused by the fact that his father was an alcoholic? So I came to the book a skeptic. That being said, I found the book very compelling. The most amazing thing about it is it seems to predict the Lewinsky scandal, and Clinton's reaction to it. Those that loath Bill Clinton will certainly enjoy it, and find it very convincing. Those that love him will dismiss it out of hand. Those who are in between will be very disturbed.

Unlike the gentleman who decided to not to dignify this reviewer's (the one who talked about how the poet was not reborn as a crow even though he should have been :-)) comments with counter remarks, let me do that. Even though I come from a very civilized upbringing, living abroad in the U.S. literally has transformed my communication to a level where I can actually talk to the "low-lives" or "choto-lok" like the one who simply wanted to express his hatred of himself (assuming it was a male, if a female or of unknown gender, please read with whatever pronoun you might find appropriate).

Yes, it is his hatred of himself. I think that thing posted two remarks with one star. I will comment on that assumption. First, there is no Hindu nationalism you moron. There might be some fundamentalists but Hindus are not nationalistic or at least like the way you sheiks or muslims are. Why am I assuming you are musolli? Because nobody from any other religion or group in this world actually will go about try to write the things that you wrote, yes, not even some white extremist group will do so.

The reviewer talked about Anglo-Hindu love affair. Well it is true. Why do you think the Anglos feel comfortable being in a love affair with the Hindus? You got it...we are equal, equal in the very process of thinking. You might not know your history. The holy books in Hinduism refer to civilized, high caste Hindus as Aryas which when used as an adjective refers to Aryan and then it became a noun when the word was in the process of being exploited. The word was exploited by some extremists in the past but it simply refers to a civilized person who has good "manners". If you speak Bengali and you are not a Hindu, then rest assured that your ancestors were. Nobody in the Indian subcontinent is a true Muslim, they are converts or outsiders who moved to India. Yes, it sounds like your ancestors might have been a "choto-lok" or "low-life".

It's funny in a sense. Whenever I try to find peace, I read Jibanananda and when I was trying to find peace here today, trying to read reviews of this book, I come across this idiot.

You know there is a thing called evolution and like the Neanderthals just vanished from the face of this earth, some subset of the mankind might follow the path. Yes, these abominations are technically human as I don't think differentiation of their genome has come to a point where reproduction with "normal" population is not possible. But it might be, sometime in the future. Just remember this, the world does not have a problem with the Anglos or the Hindus right now. Just sit down and think about why someone in the European or American literary world does not even bother to translate or write about non-Hindu literature in South-Asia. You things are things of the past. Wake up and smell the reality.

And oh yeah, hatred of the reviewer himself is so obvious. For anybody who does not know the history of Bengali literature, it flourished via the Hindus. Yes, there are some Muslim writers in Bangladesh and even in India now, but they too admit that they are heavily influenced by the Hindus who actually built the literary language in some sense. This thing I think knows that and this is why he simply can't stand the fact that nor he or any of his children or grandchildren will be able to produce such work of art as simply he does not have the genes to do so. No matter how much someone hates the Hindus, there simply isn't a way to not read Bengali literature written by Hindus, because mostly that's all there is.

I liked to believe that it's just a difference of religion which is forced upon us and is not real and all the people are the same. Over the years I have realized, it is a very optimistic idea and in the field or in harsh reality it is not a true remark. This decision was come upon by myself through the process of induction from observation.

I should mention Abdul Mannan Syed who is a upper caste Muslim (yes Muslims do have a caste system), and he dedicated many years of his life trying to bring Jibanananda to the Bengalis. And not all Muslims are bad or stupid or idiotic, but then again, most of them are. This statement is based on years and years of experience and believe me if you will. I can name almost all the Muslim writers and people who actually gave something to the literary world of Bengal and guess what they are Upper Caste muslims. The conclusion? The Muslim converts are always the low-lives, the "choto-lokera" across the sub-continent and in the world. That doesn't make it logical or appropriate to go get rid of them like many have done in the past. That is absurd and nasty. Just let them die out due to their lack of intelligence, because they will. A sort of de-facto segregation. They can't live peacefully with sects amongst themselves, how can you expect them to live peacefully with other groups?

Some people attain a height by sheer merit. But that even love's labour can help one claim a position of true significance has amply been demonstrated by what happened to this book! Seely's book is now known to almost all Jibanananda admirers a large number of whom are, to tell you the truth, not very enthusiastic about English texts. The book can act like a model as to how one should start a literary acquaintance from the scratches. It has succeeded in presenting an able perspective to Jibanananda's work in terms of a geographic, ecological, political, mythological background. The use of the folk lores, seasonal motiffs, motiffs to transcend the cultural unfamiliarities have been remarkably identified and presented. In my opinion, the translations (for most of the oft-heard poems of the poet) are quite of satisfactory standard. Bengalis lamented among themselves the relative obscurity their achievements have often been destined to and this book gave them some satisfaction and slight expectation that Jibabanananda will be appreciated by international readers if not as much as he deserved to be. The hard work that has gone into its writing and the heart-work that it has possibly achieved will reward Seely with a name not unknown to the readers of Bengali poetry. It is pity that a person of his reputation has to oblige funding authorities for the chair at Chicago University, at present being graced by him.

"A Poet Apart" is a scholarly written book by Clinton B. Seely on Jibanananda Das, the most influential poet of Bengal after Rabindranath Tagore. Poet Jibanananda, in the book by Prof. Seely, is manifested uniquely in an historical time. Prof. Seely has rightly brought forth geography, politics, myth, metaphysics, literature etc. of Bengal, in the historical sense, as the basis for the formation of the essential matrix in which the poetry of Jibanananda formed, evolved, and completed its transmutation from the visible to the invisible. Prof. Seely has done a superb literary work in bringing the life and poetry of Jibanananda Das to the English speaking readers, writers, and scholars.

The reviewer from Dallas, Texas, likes this work by Clinton Seely because he sees his Bengali-Hindu-Self-image reflected back at him by his Anglo American Master at the University of Chicago. Such Bengali-Hindu literary taste only reminds the people of Babington Macaulay's Intellectual-Poison-Tree carried along by the Bengali Hindus all the way from Calcutta, India to Dallas, Texas. To such Bengali Hindus obsessed by Cultural Nationalism, I recommend David Ludden's Masterpiece : "Making India Hindu".

"A Poet Apart" by Professor Seely is an amazing work where research scholarship, intelligence, multicultural insights gained only from experience, and poetic creativity have wonderfully blended in.

Professor Seely has lived in Bangladesh (particularly in Barisal, where Jibanananda was born and raised), deeply entrenched himself in a mix of the local people, their language, culture, natural surroundings (important to understand the Dhansiri, Hijal, Kirtankhola references), ethnicity, and socio-political tradition, studied the poet's work thoroughly, and produced a phenomenal work on the poet in this book.

The translations of Jibanananda's uniquely Bengali coinages are simply astounding. I literally felt the same milieu and complexities of the poet through the translations.

But a translation of Jibanananda's work is not the only gift you receive from this book - it is the hermeneutic effort that goes into 'fusion of cultural horizons", beyond objectivity and relativity, that astounds the reader.

Early on in the book, Seely goes into a chapter of Bengal's history, geography, people, and cultural archetype which is so carefully, respectfully, and accurately knit that it instantly establishes credibility.

The rest is for the reader to read and enjoy.

I insist that you read this book.

This book very clearly spells out the options of earning a business degree via distance learning. Accreditation (typically one of the most confusing issues facing students) is thoroughly explained, and there are no unaccredited schools listed.

My only criticism is that some schools I think are good options (such as Baker College) are left out. However, the title is "Best MBA's", so obviously some have to be left out. If you're in the market for a non-traditional business degree, buy this book.

Why waste many hours searching dead end websites when you can get the best of the best from this excellent book.

My review is based on last year's guide. Bear's Guide to the Best MBA Programs by DL was my guidepost during my selection process. The first five chapters are the best, especially the sections on vital factors in selecting a program and the section on accreditation. This information made me a much better consumer. I probably annoyed more than one admissions counselor with my questions! The detailed information on each school is only fair -- make sure you go to the schools web site instead. John Bear really cares about this topic and often posts to DL forums, so in my opinion you can trust him. He even responded to a personal email with some good advice. After exhaustive analysis, and marking up Bear's Guide from cover to cover, I choose a particular European MBA DL program. One year later, I changed to a MBA program in the US but not due to bad advice from Bear. Read the section on accreditation and choose carefully.

This book was very disappointing. The authors did a poor job researching information for the book, in particular AACSB accreditations. For example, the book incorrectly listed the following schools as AACSB accredited:
* Page 38 - California State University-Dominguez Hills;
* Page 73 - New York Institute of Technology;
* Page 76 - Nova Southeastern University;
* Page 104 - University of Dallas;
* Page 111 - University of Maryland - University College;
* Page 116 - University of Phoenix Online; and
* Page 117 - University of Phoenix.

If you are unfamiliar with AACSB accreditation, it is the premier business school accreditation.

In reality it did not really have all that much useful information in it. Also, it does not include any tuition information.

A much better resource can be found on www.GetEducated.com. They have a free eBook titled "Best Distance Learning Graduate Schools, Business & Management". It is much more up-to-date and accurate.....and best of all, it is free. I have found it to be much more useful in my online MBA search.

Good luck in finding an online MBA that suits you.

Overall, this book was helpful. I discovered about a dozen distance learning MBA programs that I wasn't aware of. However, I was disappointed with a couple of inaccuracies in the book. It listed several MBA programs as being accredited by the AACSB when in fact they weren't. Also, at the back of the book they give a url that you can check for mistakes and outdated information published in the book. The link provided is not active.

With that said, I would still recommend this book. It was helpful in pointing me to several MBA programs I didn't know about before.

I'm not here to recount the plot. I just wanted to say that this novel IS worth sticking with, even though O'Brien's style may not be for everyone. Honestly, I was really put off during the first 50 pgs. or so. As some other reviewers have mentioned, it's often difficult to tell which character is speaking in this novel. Sometimes, I'd find myself going back to prior chapters just to see if the character I was reading about had been introduced earlier. As the novel goes on, more and more characters are introduced, some who are only discussed for a mere two or three pages. This may sound annoying, but the pace of the novel is so intense and the story so riveting that I truly forgot about these "pet peeves" after awhile. I raced through this book in about three days, but if you're a fast reader, you could probably devour it in one sitting.

Any writer who can weave a story in such a compelling way that its characters infuriate me is a great writer in my opinion. O'Brien perfectly depicts religious fanatics, stubborn Irish citizens who label a rape victim as a whore, and the community members outraged by the rape and the events caused by it. We also get glimpses into the mind of Mary, the victim whose unwanted pregnancy has caused such a stir. This gives the reader a chance to look at the issues from all angles, and it makes for a truly well-rounded reading experience. I learned of O'Brien's work through an Irish Lit. class in college, a class during which we only read her short stories. Just as O'Brien's short stories don't disappoint, neither does her novel. I highly recommend it!

Mary McNamara's life in rural western Ireland is that of a typical young teenager until one day while she is on a walk on their land, her father violates the most sacred bond between parent and child and rapes her. Unable to tell anyone, she keeps the secret, except for her diary entries. When the abuse results in an unwanted pregnancy, it precipitates a national crises when she is taken to England for an abortion.
Based on real events, this novel accurately portrays how a Catholic nation can be inflamed over a cause such at this even while the morality of the citizens is in decline as evidenced by premarital sex, living in sin, affairs, and out of wedlock births.
While I enjoyed the story of Mary's plight, the novel itself was often times confusing with so many characters and shifts in focus so that after awhile you sort of lost track of who was who. By the end I was thinking it could have been told in a much more straightforward manner in less pages.
Mary's father, James, the obvious villan in this book, is a tragic figure. He seems a contradictory character, gentle with his livestock, proud of his daughter's accomplishments at school, and missing her presence, even while he violates her. Without a wife to serve his needs, it seems Mary is to fulfill that role on all counts. In the end it is hard to feel much more than pity for this pathetic nature.
Mary, for being all of fourteen, seems stronger than either of her parents in enduring the many hardhsips and allowing herself to be used by different fractions for their own purposes. It is hard to imagine what her life would be like afterwards, though the last pages try to give us a glimpse of her new life.

Edna O"Brien's story of a young girl who becomes pregnant by a relative is based on a true story.Her version successfully captures the horror and shame thrust( by supposed christians and do gooders) upon the victim of incest and rape who is too young and naive to really understand why she can't have an abortion,or why she has become of such interest to so many people.A thought provoking and sad novel which calls in to question any one who believes that all abortion or a woman's right to choose should be illegal.

In