Kennedy Books

First of all, let's get it out of the way. I really love the Kennedys. I enjoy most of the books about them and always learn something of each (yes, even the crazy conspiracy books). This book was a little different. I learned a lot. I enjoyed how it was put together. It starts with the 1950's and then takes 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963 and then Bobby Alone as separate topics. It has stories from their growing years in each as if looking back to show why they were doing what they were doing at that time in their life. I really got in the Bobby Alone section from 1964 to 1968. It showed how Bobby totally changed his views and what he went through in order to come to the conclusion that he needed to run for President. Mr. Mahoney does drag out the New Orleans, Cuban, and Mafia stuff but it's ok. Most nowadays do. I would highly recommend this book to anyone looking for a well rounded book on the Kennedy boys.

ive read other books on JFK and none of the other books can quite compair to the realism in this book. the things i didnt understand in the first few books where explained more in depth than before and i came to realize that half of the things that kennedy was blammed for after his death were not acctually his fault. for example, vietnam.

this is not a biography,it's a fiction and it's stupid, boring.
the author was surely drunk when he wrote it.
this book is a shame to the legacy of the kennedys.
there are a few photos.
buy abetter book like: rfk and his times....

Richard Mahoney is to be commended for putting together a highly readable and cogent account of the life and times of JFK and RFK, as well as their dealings with the Mafia (that led to the death of JFK). Well done.
[...]

I was raised in a conservative household and consider myself conservative in many ways (though I'm a registered independent). That said, I am 29 years old and both these men were dead before I was even born. However I have had a fascination with JFK & RFK since I first started studying history and the impact that the changes in the 1960's would have on future America. The picture on the cover is very telling about how different these brothers were -- black and white. What this book is really about is how co-dependent these two men were, with Jack more so upon Bobby. Many disturbing facts have come out about the Kennedy brothers in the last twenty years. Much of it does bother me as a moral and religious person. But that doesn't erase the fact that Jack and Bobby were very intelligent and gifted men and when it is all said and done, their idealism and determination positively impacted our nation's history.

This book starts off well, with the title picture of little Caroline and her mother reading to her. Obviously, Caroline Kennedy cherished the fact that her mother brought her up with books, and that is what made her compose this book, too. And it is evident that Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis had a very good literary taste, as can be seen by the poems and literary pieces selected. Some of these selections are favorites of mine as well.
Others may disagree as to the selections, though. But it is well known that Jacqueline had a great love and a good taste for literature and the arts at all times. I am wondering, though: Walt Whitman also wrote, "Come up from the fields, Father", an anti-war poem, which apparently was not one of Jacqueline's favorites. Also, she liked Aeschylus and Sophocles, but what about Euripides? Tennyson's ULYSSES has the famous phrase "Come, my friends, tis not too late to seek a newer world" which motivated Robert Kennedy, as is well known. And some of the authors are also my favorites, such as Homer, Shakespeare, Robert Frost, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, Edgar Allan Poe, Emily Dickinson, and others. But Caroline Kennedy did a masterful job in keeping the memory of her mother alive, and I hope her children will do the same with her. I would like to know what Caroline's favorites are.

This is my poetry nightmare. It feels more like an overdose of sleeping pills than a dynamic encounter with art. All the readers--even the normally fabulous B.D. Wong--whisper the poems as if they were sacred text, rather than living words.

This sort of thing drives people away from poetry.

The first 6 1/2 minutes, during which Caroline Kennedy drones on in a monotone are the worst. Uncle Teddy is better, but he can't sustain his energy for the long "Paul Revere's Ride."

This book is an elegant, beautifully presented collection of poems and, while I originally purchased it for myself, my then 10 year old daughter is the one who curled up on the sofa and read it cover to cover. I was surprised as she'd never shown much interest in poetry nor the Kennedys but she took great pride in being able to recite some of the poems. We also spent hours reading and re-reading the poetry. I highly recommend this book to everyone, no matter their age. Caroline Kennedy did a wonderful job of picking out poems--including one I'd never heard of before, "One Art," which talks about the "art of losing." I found this particularly poignant as it seemed to be about her brother.

The Best Loved Poems is a quality selection of poetry and includes notes and poetry by Ms. Kennedy as well, with an introduction to each section by Caroline Kennedy. A nice addition to any library. Some of the selections include: The Land of Counterpane and The Swing by Robert Louis Stevenson, Teddy Bear's Picnic by Jimmy Kennedy, Fireflies in The Garden, The Road Not Taken and The Rose Family by Robert Frost, and Paul Revere's Ride by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow.
Trish New, author of The Thrill of Hope (Amazon.com), Concepts to Ponder; South State Street Journal, Secrets of The Heart; and Memory Flatlined, Journey Beyond Reality.

I bought this book from a Middleburg, VA bookstore where many residents remember Jackie and her family through their love of horses.

This great collection of classic poetry was edited by her daughter, Caroline Kennedy. Caroline wrote a forward and an introduction to each chapter of the poetry and in her writings you achieve a depth of knowledge about Jacqueline Kennedy and an appreciation for what a fine and wonderful person she was.

Apparently it was both a Bouvier and Kennedy tradition to memorize poems and recite them at family gatherings. Many of the poems included are family favorites.

Poets included are (but not limited to): Robert Frost, ee cummings, Longfellow, Whitman, Edna St. Vincent Millay, Robert Louis Stevenson, Alfred Lord Tennyson, John Dunne, Emily Dickinson, Langston Hughes, Chistopher Marlowe, Sir Walter Raleigh, and William Shakespeare.

The book closes with a poem that Jacqueline wrote of her husband, Jack, "Meanwhile in Massachusetts", in October 1953. This poem brought tears to my eyes as I remembered how Jack Kennedy was taken away from us and his family far too soon. The poem is quite evocative of Jack Kennedy and shows how talented Jacqueline Kennedy was - seemingly a genius at everything she did.

As far as the negative reviews of this book that I have seen here, those reviewers should remember the quote: "Blowing another's candle out doesn't make your own any brighter."

Have you ever felt like you could conquer the world... if only that silly little thing called reality didn't get in the way? Dan Kennedy's wickedly funny life story is one that most of us can identify with, because at one time or another all of us have experienced painfully embarassing moments reminiscient of A Christmas Story or The Wonder Years. The writing is a little rough around the edges, which is fitting of the theme and the hilariously nagging reminder that we are all too human.

I highly recommend this book if you enjoy edgy, humourous story telling. At several points during Loser Goes First, I had to put the book down as I knew I was going to laugh uncontrollably in a public space and didn't want to look like a raving lunatic. I purposely read this book slowly so to stretch out the enjoyment of it. It's that good. I enjoyed Dan's telling about all of his crazy jobs and experiences.

Dan Kennedy's first book, an autobiographical look at life, is a strong comedic effort which results in a light read you don't want to put down for long. He details growing up in Southern California and how various failures and near-successes were just par for the course in ending up in a respectable job and as a productive member of society.

Making mistakes that often remind me of myself and are often side-splitting yet mind boggling. In a way, you may have a hard time believing someone could fall into the same traps time and again, but it happens. At times one is left to wonder if Dan is suffering from some sort of mild mental disease or retardation, but that is just a sure sign his comedy and style of writing are working! Not to spoil it, but rest assured in the end (nearly) everything works out, and our narrator seems to actual stumble into some good fortune here and there. But getting there is one hell of a trip.

I recommend to all looking for a humorous, if not inspirational, look at life. It only makes you wonder what's coming next! I'll be "first" in line to find out.

I bought this book thinking it would be an amusing insight into the life of the master of all copywriting gurus, Dan Kennedy. Well, while the writer of this book is not that Dan Kennedy and I was dissapointed at first, I did find the book very entertaining and this Dan Kennedy does indeed have writing talent -- even if it's not really any help as far as commercial copywriting goes. I definitely recommend reading the book if you're looking for something hilarious to read. However, if you're looking for the Dan Kennedy of copywriting success -- you've got the wrong author.

There's the McSweeney's writer Dan Kennedy who wrote "Loser Goes First" and there's this "How to Kick Butt at Sales and Make Millions!" Dan Kennedy. Don't get the Kennedy's confused like Amazon does --- I sadly realized this after paying for a book about making millions from selling things to friends and relatives or something. Not that I wouldn't mind making millions or anything, but my friends and relatives aren't going to buy anything from me, TRUST ME. Hey, maybe I should try to sell them this book abotu how to become a millionaire over night! At least I'd get my money back!

Loser Goes First is funny, surprise, surprise. One would imagine it would have to be after reading the author's stuff on McSweeney's every week or two. I was actually hoping the book would talk a little bit more about how his job there came about, but it was hilarious reading about every other less successful, disasterous trial and tribulation that occured before he got there.

I purchased it as a birthday gift for my mother, so haven't read it yet. She said it is wonderful reading, even a few recipes included. I am anxious to read it also.

This is a delightful book to read and enjoy during the holiday season. Caroline did a wonderful job of gathering material for her book. lt will be displayed and treasured for many Christmases to come.

I gave this as a gift this Christmas and it was very well received (despite all political sentiments).

This is a lovely extensive collection of Christmas stories and poems. Just not what I was expecting. I thought it would be stories about specific well-known families and what their Christmas traditions are, especially the Kennedys.

To be savored over the years- wonderful reading at anytime of the year. Some unusual pieces that I have never read before. The illustrations are perfect. I bought the book due to my admiration of Caroline Kennedy, but am happy that I have the book now and happy that she put the collection together.

One Hell of a Gamble: Khrushchev, Castro, and Kennedy, 1958-1964: The Secret History of the Cuban Missile Crisis I was a member of the National Battle Staff during this Crisis. As such I was present in the Alternate Military Command Center for some six days while the politicians in the US and Russia worked out a settlement. For the first time that I'm aware of this book makes it known that even the casual handler of classified material in Washington at the time knew that the Russians were moving missiles into Cuba. This had been expected, since our MRBMs in Italy and Turkey were a constant threat to the Russians, and their complaints had been loud and frequent. Thus, when intelligence channels began to pick up reports from largely previously untested US agents recently infiltrated into Cuba there was initially a tendency to downplay these. However when these reports began to proliferate from many place in Cuba, and the descriptions of the loads on the trucks jibed, there could no longer be a question as to what they were and who had moved them in. For that reason Kennedy's rather rabid reaction surprised the hell out of those of us who had watched the emplacement of Russian missiles over the past several months. (My memory says that I first read of this subject in late May of '62, but I couldn't swear to that. If not May then it was very soon thereafter.) Unfortunately some of the reviews talk about the "War Hawks" in the Pentagon. Those "War Hawks" knew more than anyone else on earth at the time of the effects of a nuclear exchange with Russia. At the same time they were charged with conducting a successful exchange (should there be such a thing) while the duty of the politicians was to see that the situation did not deteriorate to that degree. As the days went by after the first alert and the launching of our bomber force, it became apparent that the US, and presumably Russia, were faced with a deteriorating situation where the longer the crisis continued the requirement to bring down bombers and crew for required systems maintenance and crew rest/exchange was a factoid that had to be reckoned and dealt with accordingly. This is what the JCS were attempting in every way they knew how to get across to their political superiors. If those JCS voices sound shrill in retrospect it is only because they were exercising their sworn duty. Believe me, those of us who had the most knowledge of nuclear weapons and their effects were happier than anyone else when the crisis was resolved without their use. As was quoted at the time, none of us knew for sure what weapons would be unveiled for WW III. But we knew that WW IV was going to be fought with sticks and stones.

This book is a very well researched book. It looks at the issues form various points of view, and it's well worth picking up to add to a collection of texts on this period.

However (please correct me if Im wrong), this bookk misses one crucial chapter in the crisis that is curcial to understaing the background to this crisis, and is mentioned in a text book I use to teach this subject. Castro went to the US very early on, seeking US aid and to explian his nationalisation plans. He was quite reasonable- he offered to pay off the companies he took over, and wanted to negotiate, but the US refused. This left him no choice but to lean toward the USSR.

Why is this missing from this text???

This is a pretty essential book for understanding the Crisis as well as the Cold War and a real turning point in it. The authors do a great job of describing, based on research in the archives, how the Soviet - Cuban relationship evolved. The US moves are told in less detailed fashion, which makes this a good companion to the Beschloss' book The Crisis Years, which tells the Kennedy/US side in great detail. What makes this book a great experience is hearing the tale told more from the Soviet point of view.

Fortunately for the world, the instinctive decision making of both Kennedy and Khrushchev were wise enough to avoid a war in the end. While on both sides, particularly the American side, there were militarists arguing for warfare, invasion, nuking and all that, the two leaders never lost control of their governments or their collaboration on resolving it short of war. For both, it was probably their finest hour.

The telling of the "13 days" of the crisis is a little flat in this book, oddly enough. What is more exciting is the whole lengthy build up to that crisis point. The "gamble" was being played by both sides, but Khrushchev's gamble of putting nukes on Cuba and creating a satellite out of that country and its often uncontrollably nationalistic leader was far greater than what Kennedy was trying to do. One could argue that the US could have taken out Castro and gotten away with it up until Bay of Pigs; after that, the stakes increasingly became too high.

You see through this book the kind of pressure Khrushchev's style of world communist leadership was putting on the West. Yet, Castro tested just how aggressive Khrushchev was willing to be. By 1960, the Soviet Revolutionaries were getting on in years and were no longer so impetuous and daring. They wanted a little safer Mano a Mano with the US. Castro doesn't do very well in this book, although he was kind of taken advantage of by the Soviets. Still, at the height of the crisis, he was the one egging on the Soviets to pull the trigger and nuke the Yanquis. Fortunately, Castro's behavior not only did not sway Khrushchev but also convinced him that the nukes should not stay in Cuba in part because he could not trust Castro's judgment.

The irony is that in a sense, Castro got what he wanted: a guarantee that the US would not invade Cuba. Khrushchev's gamble and negotiating made it safe for his regime to continue, which it has done for nearly half a century.

Two Harvard scholars, Russian Historian Aleksandr Fursenko and American Historian Timothy Nafatali expose the missing gaps to one of the Cold War's most pivotal episodes - the Cuban Missile Crisis. In their 1998 book One Hell of a Gamble, they convincingly argue that the Post-WWII episode was an international dilemma. Contending that "no one person or government created the mix of interest, power, and fear that nearly exploded in 1962," the authors develop a sound narrative that illuminates the finer details of the crisis. They succeed marvelously, with minor exceptions, at explaining the Soviet and American nuances of the dramatic history involved in the early 60's. Beginning with the rise of revolutionary leader Fidel Castro and ending with Khrushchev's demise, the work chronicles the delicate balance of power that tilted back and forth between the superpowers and Cuba.

The authors masterfully handle Soviet archives, and American sources, but the authors somewhat clumsily rifle through Cuban historiography. The opening chapters, however, do correctly portray Castro's budding relationship with the Soviet Union, and his diminishing alliance with the United States. And the failed Bay of Pigs operation coupled with Kennedy's campaign promise to "not be soft" on Cuba, did indeed solidify Castro's motivation to ally with the Soviets. In contrast, one of the chief frailties of the work lies with the somewhat unclear portrayal of Castro's image and relationship with key confidants. Granted, the authors lacked access to Cuban archives, but the absence of corroboration leaves room for question. For instance, the authors portray Castro as having a "privileged background" in his early years and offer little evidence to substantiate this claim. This description of Castro, however, contradicts most scholarship on the dictator's earlier years. Ernesto Betancourt, Washington Representative to Castro in the late 50's, noted that Castro was "one of the illegitimate children of the house servant sired by his father." Betancourt further noted that Castro was embarrassed about his childhood and disillusioned by not being allowed to utilize the "facilities established for American staffers at the United Fruit Club." The club, which in part was established by the profits of his father's sugar plantation, created a wedge of indifference between the young Castro and the Americans. According to Betancourt, the aforementioned facts led to the complex that feeds Castro's "inferiority against the Cuban upper classes . . . [and] . . . the United States in general." The author's portrayal of Castro's image as a young man was incomplete and somewhat misleading. With a minor lapse in scholarship, the authors quickly change academic gears and advance a sound narrative on the Soviet historiography of the crisis.

Utilizing a trove of recently accessible Soviet archives, the Harvard scholars introduce new behind- the- scene details of how the crisis unfolded. The Soviets, of course, capitalized on America's failed overthrow of Cuba. Khrushchev estimated that the deployment of nuclear warheads ninety miles from America's coastline would tip the strategic nuclear balance in the Soviet's favor and would support the Cuban revolution. Moreover, he projected that the deployment of warheads could be kept secret until it was too late for the U.S. to act. This, of course, was an error in judgment - as U-2 reconnaissance planes quickly determined the presence of missiles in Cuba. Formerly, scholars ascribed to the belief that hard-liners in the Kremlin forced, or highly encouraged, Khrushchev to place Soviet warheads on the island nation. However, the evidence presented by the authors discounts this premise - and strongly suggests that Khrushchev's acted alone in this decision.

After the American discovery of warheads in Cuba in October of 1962, the two superpowers engaged in active diplomatic negotiations. In previous histories of the crisis, it was thought that only official and public channels were utilized for communications between the countries. Utilizing a partially transcribed collection of the Kennedy ExCom (Executive Committee) tapes, we learn for the first time about a small network of back channel communications - which proved to be vital in the continuing negotiations for peaceful resolution to the crisis. For instance, Aleksandr Alekseev, the Soviet Ambassador to Havana, provided an informal communication channel between the Cubans and Soviets. Similarly, Georgi Bolshakov a Soviet Intelligence officer, relayed messages between the Soviets and Americans via Robert Kennedy and American journalist Frank Holeman.

Ironically, the authors reveal that Kennedy provided private concessions to the Kremlin via Bolshakov during the critical thirteen days of the crisis. Most importantly, Kennedy agreed to remove the American Jupiter missiles from Turkey - a revelation that was not publicized to the media.

Interestingly, only bilateral sources, namely known intelligence officers and journalists, were noted in this work. The authors, however, fail to mention the GRU spy, Oleg Penkovsky, who allegedly provided the CIA with detailed information on the Soviet missile capabilities and locations at the time. In The Spy Who Saved the World, Penkovsky was given credit for relaying crucial intelligence reports to the Kennedy Administration, which allegedly contributed to his decision for a quarantine of the Soviet naval fleet. It remains unclear why Fursenko and Naftali omitted this fact; perhaps they had no detailed evidence that the U.S had legitimate clandestine sources. Of course, de-classified intelligence archives from both the CIA and KGB may have been sanitized; and therefore, may have limited the author's ability to understand and synthesize intelligence sources. Whatever the case, the Penkovsky exclusion limits the intelligence scholarship of the missile crisis. One question the authors may have raised, was whether Kennedy fully utilized intelligence provided by unilateral human sources, such as Penkovsky, during the crisis?

Thankfully for mankind, the careful deliberations between Kennedy and Khrushchev resulted in a peaceful compromise that averted a thermo-nuclear war. The authors concluded that after the missile crisis "Khrushchev and Kennedy were now willing to take risks for better relations." Their efforts established a détente between the two superpowers - but one that was brief. Unfortunately, the short-lived prospect faded after the November 1963 Kennedy assassination and the October 1964 coup that removed Khrushchev from power.
One hell of a Gamble is a tremendously detailed work that exceeds previous scholarship on the post-WWII crisis. The authors offer compelling evidence that the crisis came closer to spinning out of control than once thought. We discover that Castro, Khrushchev, and Kennedy were "ultimately driven by a sense of what was best for themselves, and for their people." Moreover, the authors convincingly demonstrate that Cuba became the pivotal pawn in the Cold War chess match between the Soviets and the Americans. So persuasive was their story, that film director Ronald Donaldson used the context of their work for the film Thirteen Days - which depicted the crucial two weeks of the missile crises. Although an unexceptional account of the crisis on the American and Cuban fronts, the authors do offer an authoritative interpretation on Soviet historiography during the 1962 crisis. Cold War scholars should pay careful attention to this work, which highlights some of the missing details of an especially tense period during the Cold War.

In 1958, Fidel Castro and his band of guerillas successfully overthrew the despised Batista regime in Cuba. At the time, Castro was a question mark for US policymakers. He actually was invited to visit the US and gave a speech at Harvard. However, his domestic socialist reforms caused consternation in Washington, while the communist affiliations of his leading supporters (e.g. his brother, Raul, and Che Guevara) created outright alarm. The authors infer that in 1958 Castro could have gone either way, i.e. communist or non-communist. However, Washington's thinly veiled distrust and eventual outright hostility against him supposedly pushed him into seeking Soviet support.

The book then continues, following Castro's ascension to power, his increasing fear of US-backed invasion, and his greater and greater demands for increased Soviet protection. Surpisingly, the Soviets initially had as little interest in Castro's Cuba as Washington. However, the Cold War was on, and Kruschev was eager to project Soviet influence at the expense of Mao's communist China. And what better way to assert Soviet prestige than by establishing a Soviet communist beachhead just off America's shores.

As the US stepped up its belated and ineffectual covert operations aimed at destabilizing and eventually toppling the Castro regime, Castro sought ever more Soviet economic, and especially military, assistance. One of the Soviet's first major successes was in implementing the block surveillance program. Arms shipments became greater, more frequent, and more obvious. However, Soviet-Castro relations became endangered by one of Castro's rebellious communist lieutenants, and the Soviets were stymied by their deficiency in ICBMs. Thus, Kruschev made the fateful and audacious decision to deploy Soviet medium and intermediate range nuclear missiles and bombers in Cuba.

Much of the rest of the story is well-known. American U2 reconnaisance flights over Cuba reveal the construction of Soviet missile and bomber bases. Kennedy goes on national TV to alert the US public to the crisis and gain support for potential military action. Behind the scenes, a deal is desperately sought to end the crisis. Ultimately, Kruschev publicly agrees to remove nukes from Cuba, while Kennedy privately agrees to reciprocate in removing American missiles from Turkey.

The book reveals a great deal about how strongly individual personalities affect history and national leadership. It also demonstrates how completely inept and unrealistic the CIA's operations were in Cuba. There were a few times during Castro's rise to power that the US had a chance of courting him; however, their own ignorance of Cuba's internal politics assured they would never capitalize on it. From my standpoint, the entire crisis could have been easily avoided by resolute leadership in the White House - either make Castro an ally, oust him when he was still weak, or guarantee that Cuba will not be military threatened by the US. The fault lies with both Eisenhower and Kennedy for their weak and vacillating policies towards Castro.

A must read for every disillusioned patriot. Dispite all of the current negativism in and torwards the current state of affairs, there will always be a brighter day to come and the hopefulness, positivism and true courage that America possesses will come through again. Ours is a rich heritage, thank you Ms Kennedy for organising it so eloquently.

A Patriot's Handbook celebrates many of the finest moments in American history. Contrary to what a few reviewers have said, however, this is not a mere collection of flag-waving sound-bites. I honestly wonder if they read the same book I did. The version I had contained portions from The Jungle, talking about the unfairness of certain economic systems in place at the time. The version I had contained biting and accurate commentary directed at american racism. Yes, there is (justifiable) pride in some of our most prized cultural notions, from the Statue of Liberty to the seperation of church and state. Never, however, believe that A Patriot's Handbook is all flag-waving. Critical self-examination is also called for by the carefully selected passages, recalling the notion that, at times, dissent is patriotic. The book celebrates what is great in our culture, but does not hesitate to remind us that we are not now, nor have we ever been, perfect. In so doing, it points the way towards perfecting ourselves. An excellent job.

This book is an amazing compilation of those things most precious to our heritage. It's so wonderful to get a cup of coffee and sit down and read one passage, or chapter, at a time.....and that being something as wonderful and unique as "Casey at the Bat" or one of John Kennedy's speeches. I gave these as gifts to the partners in our firm and heard overwhelming praise for the book.

When I went looking for a book that had all the famous speeches and quotes throughout history, I had a lot of trouble. Then I found this book. It has everything. Plus it also has background information about each speech or literary piece. I love how it also quotes songs, literature and even movies. We use this book all the time. My son loved reading the transcript from when the first men walked on the moon!! I highly recommend this book.

This anthology of pictures, songs, stories, and poetry contains a world of American History spoken and unspoken. Her mother would be pleased. Carrol Wolverton, author, Back Bay Boston Basement

I am not a die-hard Jackie O fan, but I love fashion in general. I have always thought of Jackie O as a fashion icon, and wanted to learn more about her. Until now, I have never seen a book that pictorally does her sense of style justice. However, in this book there are enough photographs both in black and white and in color to satisfy any fashion junkie or Jackie O fan. No matter what the situation, Jackie O was always appropriately and fashionably attired. This book does an excellent job of showing this by portraying her clothing choices through the years and in a variety of categories. This book does not go into great detail about Jackie O as a person or historical figure, I don't think it was written with those objectives in mind, but it should satisfy the fashion cravings of most people. I highly recommend it.

While this book features some interesting facts and pictures, I was very disappointed to find that the author almost completely disregards Jackie's use of accessories. I had hoped to learn about the handbags Jackie used, but despite brief references to her clutches, the only time he talked about them was to wrongly call the Gucci 'Jackie' bag - named after the woman herself - a Hermes tote. He also craftily avoids the subject of her shoes. Disappointing.

Having grown up in the 60's, and being a Fashion Major as well as a big fan of Jackie Kennedy I was excited to read this book, and pleasantly surprised with Mulvaney's perspective on Mrs. Kennedy's wardrobe. I own many books on Jackie Kennedy and was particularly impressed with the photos and information presented in this book on this fashion icon. I read this book from cover to cover in one day. The photos are stunning, and images of Mrs. Kennedy through her husband's White House years as well as post years are presented in black and white along with color. If you are a Jackie Kennedy admirer, or a Fashion History buff; this is a phenomenal book to add to your collection...well worth the hardback price anywhere!

I absolutely loved this book. Jackie just looks so beautiful. Her fashion sense is remarkable. And she looks so elegant and beautiful. She was simply the greatest.

Who else, in all the other First Ladies, could have worn all those beautiful clothes with the chic and style Jackie had! Not many I guess. In this beautiful book, there are some never seen before pictures, that demonstrates what elegance in fashion is all about. It will take a long time before we can see that again in the White House. I treasure that book that makes me relive that unique period of refinement and class that once was in the White House, thanks to Jackie!

If there's one thing that makes Robert Kennedy enduring, it is the real and symbolic gestures of genuine hope and belief in the American political system he produced in the hearts and minds of Americans.

Mr. Sidoranko's treatment of Kennedy is stellar, fresh, and thankfully does not succumb to the heroizing syndrome that we can so easily criticize in other Kennedy accounts and authors.

This book, refraining from distracting hyperbole, maintains a compassionate leaning-towards but fair-minded, even sometimes, somewhat dispassionate tone.

Sidoranko's convincingly sustained argument for Robert Kennedy's spiritual/religious dynamic will make a useful contribution to further examination of an extremely important politician and historical figure of ever-increasing national interest and debate.

The focus of this book--RFK's spirituality as a genuine force of his character and life--is a warm-blooded debate and is a highly charged and complex idea, deserving of closer scrutiny. RFK aficionados will appreciate Sidorenko's sophisticated understanding of Kennedy's disparate impulses and his indiosynchratic basis of belief and faith, while the general reader will enjoy his uncluttered analysis. Engaging reading especially for those new to Kennedy.

Played out against the backdrop of the turbulent 1960's the author tackles the complex life of RFK, a man of contrasting, often contradictory personal and public policies, views and actions, and shapes his story into a brisk and fairly compelling narrative that reflects the lasting effect of Bobby Kennedy on the politics of our times. Kennedy was a puzzling politician, but Mr. Sidorenko renders a comprehensive story of his life and the role his spiritual dimension played in shaping his life, his politics and policy, and ultimately history.

Very good reading.

I've read many/most of the RFK bios out there, and was really excited to pick up this one. While I doubted so slim a book could contain much insight, I was hopeful as I read the book jacket & skimmed the pages that this would be a much-needed corrective to all the half-truths, negativity, and speculation that has afflicted even such promising RFK efforts as Evan Thomas's book of a couple years ago.

I was really disappointed! First, the book is even slimmer than it looks because there are several pages of photographs in there. There are also some really glaring errors of grammar, punctuation, and even fact in this book. One that comes immediately to mind: in the bibliography, Sidorenko indicates he relied on Jeff Shesol's "Mutual Contempt," which is listed as being published in 1977. Jeff Shesol wasn't even in in high school in 1977 (his book was actually published in 1997). The writing style is clunky. Take this example from page 130: "Time sobered heads inebriated by shock. Robert Kennedy began a process that took about six days. Most meetings the president did not attend. Security required that all seem normal at the White House." Inebriated by shock? WHAT process? I thought the subject was RFK, not the president.

Actually, I blame the editors & publisher far more than the author. This book is part of some series called "Lives & Legacies," but there's no explanation of what the series is all about, and if this is how the whole series is edited, I wouldn't buy another book in it at all. In fact, I'd avoid any books put out by this seemingly bush-league publisher.

The author poses some interesting questions: Did, as author Ronald Steel has suggested, Bobby Kennedy use the rhetoric of religion--along with civil rights and liberal causes as a ruse for personal gain?

Was Kennedy a chameleon using change simply to feed his personal ambitions?

Or wasn't it more to the point that growth was a constant theme in Kennedy's life--"a steady evolution and not based on epiphanic interruptions"?

Author Konstantine Sedorenko is very convincing when he says Faith was "neither politics nor pandering" for Robert Kennedy and that his spiritual and religious training kept him from embracing only worldly ambitions.

True, ambition brought him to the edge, but, as the author smartly shows, worldly purpose fused with religious imperatives and values in Bobby's case, and the final leap into national politics, the political and social issues of his day, and finally, the presidential pool "came from his deep moral essence."

Is worldly purpose necessarily at odds with religious and moral values or principals and standards? Bobby Kennedy's history and story, if one stands back and attempts to view objectively--as perhaps only an outsider can--would indicate quite the opposite.

Kennedy's legacy indeed, to quote Sedorenko, "set the stage whereby future politicians could lead with no less conviction and hope."

Finally, one thing that definitely can be said about Robert F. Kennedy: he never pulled any punches--not with his cohorts and not with the American public. Neither does Sedorenko in this dynamic portrait of a most complex man--one who could and firmly did--take a moral stance in a time when America needed "more than the advice cold war tacticians could supply."

Although, I am always little pathetic when it comes to Dan Kennedy books - I must say that this one is again a masterpiece, and just do not trust a reviewer who says this one is a commercial for inner circle.
I am fan of Mr. Kennedy books I admit that, but if you will try to read at least any of his books - I started with No B.S. Time Management for Entrepreneurs (No B.S. Series) - you will also become a long term fan of this author.
It's title is exactly what the book does - there is no BS advices, techniques & suggestions.
There is no usual "think outside the box, think positive, do your best and result will come inevitably" book.
There is a CONCRETE steps. There is EXACT advices. There are REAL world examples
Author says it's from his OWN carrier, unlike some new authors, especially in internet marketing topics, who's profession are author, and this is how he earn.
Here is a words from real word entrepreneur, who was selling himself.
If you take just 1 - I repeat only 1 advice what he calls - LET THEM SPEAK FOR YOU, I suppose sales will be lifted a lots and lots of times

I HIGHLY recommend this book to everyone who's mind is open to this fantastic, inspiring, fresh and invaluable book.

If you have never heard of Dan Kennedy and his No BS series of books, then you don't know what you are missing. Dan is a true salesman. Whether in print, copy, informercials or speaking he is always selling. And what's wrong with that? Some reviewers criticize that the books sounds like an informercial. That is what Kennedy does, he sells!

One of the key insights of the book is to never settle for second best, and always look to get the maximum returns for your efforts. You do this by holding yourself, your sales teams and your marketing 100% accountable for results. No ifs, ands, buts or excuses.

The book is broken up into six parts.

1. 15 Strategies for exceptional succes.
2. How to stop prospecting once and for all.
3. A No BS Start-to-Finish structure for the sale.
4. Dumb and Dumber: Things That Sabotage Sales Success.
5. My Biggest Secret To Exceptional Results In Selling.
6. Sales Tools and Technology.

There is also a "Bonus" Kennedy book reprinted in the back, "How To Read Anyone's Mind".

Highly recommended, but if you are not going to try some of the tactics and put them to use, then you may want to look elsewhere for something you are more comfortable with.

Cheers!

If you want the nuts and bolts of creating a deliberate sales process, then make this book a permanent fixture on your desk. Don't put it back on the bookshelf after you read. Use it as an ongoing tool.

Fight The Good FightKennedy is King when it comes to marketing. I own his Magnetic Marketing series. I can't began to tell you the valuable info I've gained from his products.

I admit I am a big fan of Dan Kennedy,so I was not disappointed with the NO BS Sales Success. There are pearls of wisdom for the experienced salesperson as well as the newbie who still believes the customer really will "think about it"and get back to him. Well worth reading and re reading again.

A gift to my old friend who ever read few
books from the same authors.

Senator John F. Kennedy's slim victory (less than 150,000 votes) over Vice-President Richard M. Nixon in 1960 was arguably the 20th century's most iconic. Kennedy's generation, "born in this century," linked American history and heroes with still-modern inventions of instant polling and television to face the legacy of a beloved war hero president, his formidable vice-president and eight years of their "peace and prosperity."

Theodore H. White's influential bestseller, "The Making of the President 1960," not only chronicles the primaries, speeches, strategy sessions, debates, and final tallies, but was largely where 1960's election, and its victor, began owning their singular places in U.S. history.

Beginning fittingly at campaign's end with Kennedy's stressful, exhilarating victory night, the book unfolds candidate strategies from primary to convention to the weeks between Bill Mazeroski's World Series-ending home run and that November 7. White is novelist, journalist and historian chronicling the Democratic party torch passing from hero Adlai Stevenson (a reluctant if overpoweringly influential candidate) to Kennedy at the Los Angeles convention. With unprecedented access to President Kennedy, campaign manager Bobby Kennedy (provocatively described as a Catholic "Boston Puritan"), and their brain trusts, White sketches the candidate's vigor, intellect, and humor making him cultural equal to era icons Franklin Roosevelt and Elvis Presley.

Without nearly the access to the then-vice president or his staff (part of Nixon's hostility to press which reached dizzying heights a decade later) White's views on Nixon are observational, quotes from formally prepared speeches or advisors speaking off-record. Eisenhower's Republican torch becomes a hot potato jumping from New York governor Nelson Rockefeller to industry captains supporting the party to what White describes as Nixon's mix of stubbornness (with a 50-state strategy), bad luck, bad TV imagery, and a touch of greed. This led Nixon to make decisions perceived strategically right over those morally right (both candidates' reaction to Dr. Martin Luther King's Georgia imprisonment weeks before the election being a watershed example.)

But for its merits in describing Kennedy and Nixon's exhausting marathon to the Oval Office (and hardships of accompanying staffers and even reporters), White's most valuable chapter for today's reader is "Retrospect on Yesterday's Future." Any political science or sociology student must read White's chronicle of 1960's changing demographics: contrasts between black/white, urban/suburban, regional/ethnic ("red" and "blue" state values are spot-on described without color) and, most notably, Catholic/Protestant. (Kennedy's famous speech to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association, taking his religious and presidential responsibilities head-on, is reprinted as an appendix.)

White gives this humanity and immediacy making particular episodes (Nixon's Atlanta rally, Hubert Humphrey's long bus ride in Wisconsin and his awkward TV telethon, Kennedy's final speech as candidate in Connecticut) seem fresh and evocative of their time. White shows 1960 as slamming shut the "simpler time" many envision the 1950s to be. This not only stems because of the horrible tragedies awaiting both men, but Big Media's ever-larger bytes and swallows of political discussion and drama.

Anyone wanting to understand modern American politics, strategiesm and motivations in place even to this year's election must start here. "The Making of the President 1960" should be required for any voter helping to make one in 2008 and beyond.

Nowadays, when a campaign book is written it amounts to little more than a collection of Newsweek articles. Theodore White's Making of the Presidency 1960 on the other hand gets into the nuts and bolts of presidential campaigns, party machinery, and voter demographics in a way not really seen anymore. It's about the big ideas that shape national elections and the individual people that make it all operate.

Given the current political process, some of the 1960 action seems quite distant. First, several candidates were aiming for a convention strategy, completely ignoring the primaries that were then far less important. Second, at one point the book mentions eight minute statements given by Kennedy and Nixon during one of their debates. Nowadays, we are lucky if a debate statement on the most important national issue lasts for more than two minutes.

The book's publication in 1961 also makes it interesting, as it leaves the reader at the threshold of the Kennedy presidency but is completely unaware of the events to follow. Not only does this include the assassination of two Kennedy brothers, but also the election of Richard Nixon to the presidency in 1968.

I have also read the Making of the Presidency 1964, but not the two successive volumes. I highly recommend this and the follow-up.

I very much enjoyed reading this book - having polished it off in a day. This book really takes you back into a very different era of American politics and culture. Indeed, there were only 3 major television networks, 2 wire services (which fed local newspapers), and no cable or internet. Moreover, the Presidential nomination process was quite different from what it is today. Back then, party conventions actually conducted substantive business, with deals and compromises being made, and floor battles beign waged (whereas today's conventions are largely a waste of time and money). Also, both major Presidential candidates sought to carry the broad segment of the electorate, not just certain geographic regions (there was not the concept of "Red" states and "Blue" states that exists today - many of the states were "in play" for most of the campaign).

I also enjoyed Mr. White's interesting analysis of American culture and society, circa 1960. He takes readers through a colorful discussion of trends and changes that have occurred and connects them with the political scene. This definitely puts the unfolding of the campaign and election into a greater perspective.

I have read a number of criticisms that Mr. White was unduly biased toward John F. Kennedy in this book. I do not see this as being accurate - he does not present Kennedy as some sort of secular saint. Moreover, (and I am no great admirer of Kennedy), Kennedy did have a great deal of charisma that lent itself to positive press coverage. In a later book, Mr. White takes a similar tack toward Ronald Reagan. Mr. White does show some empathy toward Richard Nixon, though he rightly criticizes him for not making better use of President Eisenhower's immense popularity and goodwill with the American people. Nixon, of course, will ultimately win a Presidential contest, though under a different set of circumstances.

Interestingly, I don't think that either Kennedy or Nixon would have won their respective party's Presidential nomination in the current political climate. This is because both men were, at heart, center-leaning pragmatists, not given to being in lockstep with the ideological orthodoxy that exists today in both parties.

On a critical note, Mr. White does not mention the controversial election returns that took place in Chicago and Texas, or about the dubious (to put it nicely) dealings of Joseph P. Kennedy, who took an active role in the campaign, despite an appearance of aloofness. I think that Mr. White should have included this, and that doing so would not have harmed the book.

While it would seem this book would be very dated, I found it to be incredibly interesting and unintentionally relevant to the modern political world. First though, the book reads incredibly easy. Ted White was a journalist and thus this feels more like a direct piece, rather than an academic's thesis. The story of the election moves along with a few pauses for in-depth analysis. The focus shifts in every chapter, so it doesn't become monotonous.
I especially liked reading the book because it was about John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon and written from a perspective that is hard to find: before JFK was shot and Nixon resigned. Instead the book treats them just as two young pols, eager to ascend to the highest office.
Additionally, many of the positions of the Democrats and Republicans, as well as response by the American people seems unchanged despite the past nearly 50 years. Looking at the parties as they began to form their present state provides insight into how our political scene today developed.
All in all, I recommend this book to anyone who's interested either in Nixon, Kennedy, or presidential campaigning in general. They'll find it almost humorous in how some descriptions written in 1961 still apply in 2007, and how most tactics are still being used.