Stanley Books

I bought this book at Lowe's as a random book to read. It ended up being extremely helpful for small projects around the house. Highly recommended as a reference book for little home projects.

This book contains tons of high quality, color photos. The photos take up about half the book. Although the photos are nice and give me a good idea of what I need to do, I still found myself wanting a more detailed explanation on many of the topics. I am fairly handy around the house. Yet, I found myself needing and wanting information that this book did not mention.
In all fairness, if the book went into details on all of the topics, it would be a foot thick and cost a lot more.

Very through book. Goes over wiring and more. Even goes into internet and data info. Great buy.

The Stanley Complete Wiring Book is great for tackling the weekend projects all the way to completely wiring an entire house.

The book is laid out in easy to find sections with easy to follow instructions and detailed steps. The pages are not cheap, thin pages but heavy, glossy, easy to turn pages. The book has over 800 full-color pictures and detailed illustrations.

Whatever your project is, you can find it in this book. Each project begins with a prestart checklist and tips. It also includes problem solving and explains options. At the end of the book, it includes metric conversions.

Sections include:
Working Safely, Getting Ready, Checking Your Electrical System, Basic Techniques, Repairs, Switches and Receptacles, Lights and Fans, Planning New Electrical Service, Installing Cable and Boxes, New Receptacles and Lights, Installing Fans and Heaters, Household Voice, Data and Security, Outdoor Wiring, and Appliances and New Circuits

This book has everything a homeowner needs to know about wiring. Good book. Highly recommend.

This book has got to be one of the best illustrated wiring books. I have used this book for multiple minor projects. The photographs allow you to follow closely and clearly as to the correct process for wiring. I lost my 1st book to rain, just ordering my office reference book now. Now I have a "working copy" and a home reference copy (safetly tucked away). The book is good enought that I bought it twice.

Apologetics Concerning the Nature of Religion

Apologetics or is it antiapologetics, I have read Hodges arguments about cause and effect, primary and secondary causes in his work on systematic theology which was written a hundred years after this work. RC Sproulamong others discuss similar issues today with a contrary conclusion. David Hume's dialogue about the existence of God and the attributes of God does form some of the frame work for further philosophic and theological discussion. Some seems quite aimless like his discussion whether God is wholly other. Some theologians may make this statement and argument, but this certainly is not fundamentalist or scriptural perspective of God. What I found most interesting in this work is his discussion of causality. Mr. Hume's focus was on Natural theology or the idea that God could be perceived or not perceived through nature. But also included was knowing God through rationalization. To this he compared three notions:

{1} That there is a self existent Being who always existed, never created, and is the ultimate Cause of the whole universe. Something that never was caused, but is the cause of all else.

{2}That there is no ultimate cause. History is an infinite amount of causes and effects that has no starts or ends. Matter in some form has always existed and matter has always been in motion. Universe or galaxy may have a point of beginning, but not what it is composed of.

{3}At a point in time there was no matter, then at another point of time there was matter. The matter move in motion to develop things as we know it.

David Hume does not discuss the concept that simply nothing really exists. I would guess in an earlier work he had dismissed it in some form. It is my conclusion Mr. Hume found point one as absurd as point 2 or 3.

The other major focus of discussion in this work how an all knowing creator, who has all power, and has the capacity to perceive every thing that is going on can create a world that has the highest being of creation suffer pain and evil among each other. The argument is made in this work that the universe does not function in a rational manner, therefore such all knowing, all powerful and all powerful God does not seem to exist. Some reviewers consider it a complete debunk of intelligent design and it certainly a source of comfort for those who do desire.

With the possible exception of his incalculably influential A Treatise of Human Nature, this, I think, is Hume's finest work. The Dialogues is a paradigm of sustained philosophical argumentation on a single subject, and I can't think of a more inspiring work of philosophy. Another reason to read this book is that Hume is one of the few philosophical figures whose work is worth reading as literature. His prose is, of course, lovely and clear as can be; and the Dialogues is packed with the sort of evocative passages that readers of Hume except to find in his work. Furthermore, he's clearly mastered the dialogue format as a way of writing philosophy. He never turns his interlocutors into ciphers spouting the details of their respective positions. Each character has a forceful and distinct personality, and each of them comes to the debate with a well-defined position and adequate means of defending it. In short, I can't recommend this book highly enough.

Most of the Dialogues is devoted to discussion of a posteriori arguments for the existence of God. The main argument considered here is the classical argument from design, which Hume seems to understand as an analogical argument of the following sort: the complexity and order of the universe show that it is similar to artifacts created by human intelligences; similar causes have similar effects; therefore, the universe must have been created by a being with something like a human intelligence; therefore, the universe must have been created by God.

Hume's objections to this argument are legion, and many of the individual objections are both ingenious and forceful. He provides reasons for thinking that the universe isn't all that similar to artifacts created by human beings. He argues, for instance, that at least in some respects, the universe resembles animal or vegetable life more than it resembles artifacts created by human beings. Hume also provides for thinking that, even if we think the universe is similar to a human artifact, we ought to think the universe was created by a being quite unlike God. The relevant empirical evidence, he argues, provides us with no good reason to think that the universe wasn't created by multiple beings (large human artifacts are usually created by multiple beings), or that the being(s) who created it are still alive (human creators die), or that the being(s) who created it were infinite (it's not clear that creating the finite universe would have required infinite power), or that the being(s) who created it were morally perfect (the universe, with all its misery and despair, certainly isn't what one would expect from a perfect being). Furthermore, he proposes certain alternative naturalistic explanations of the existence and nature of the universe; and he claims that it's unclear why an appeal to divine creation is to be preferred to these speculative naturalistic stories of the universe's creation.

As I hope this all-too-brief synopsis suggests, Hume's cumulative case against the argument from design is quite impressive. It is, of course, possible to avoid some of these criticisms in various ways, and his speculative naturalistic explanations leave quite a bit to be desired. But the total case is a philosophical demolition par excellence. Indeed, I'm pretty sure that Hume has shown that the argument from design is more or less worthless as support for anything resembling traditional theism. So, if you're enamored of that argument, I suggest you pick up book and wrestle with the criticisms found here.

Now, this isn't all Hume discusses in the Dialogues. There's a section discussing a priori arguments for the existence of God; it focuses on arguments against a version of the cosmological (i.e. first cause) argument. And Hume's arguments concerning the cosmological argument also rule out any sort of ontological argument, as he claims that no sense can be made of the idea of a necessarily existing being. The book also includes a few some brief discussion of particular issues concerning religion.

Where, in the end, does Hume come down on the issue of theism? It's hard to tell, as it's not clear that any of the particular characters speaks for him. Philo, the character who often appears to be speaking for him, never denies the existence of a deity; he simply denies the ability of human reason to discover anything substantial about what such a being is like. That Hume agrees with this is, I think, the most we can glean from this text about Hume's own religious views. It seems clear that he has no sympathy for organized religion, or for any religious views that purport to describe the nature of God, His intentions, or how and why He created the universe as He did. And the only positive religious claim that is given respectful treatment here is the bare claim that we have reason to think that the cause of the universe as a whole is somewhat similar to a human intelligence.

But does acceptance of this minimal thesis amount to his being a theist? Again, it's very hard to tell. First, of course, one might wonder whether this fairly vague positive view is enough to amount to some form of theism. But let's put that issue to one side. Even if it is enough to support some form of theism, it's often difficult to tell whether Hume means to be advocating such a position here. The problem is that it often seems Hume's explicit advocation of this position amounts to little more than a description of what he thinks is an inevitable human tendency to think this way. Given how our minds actually work, he seems to think, we're bound to think something like this about the origin of the universe. Yet it's somewhat unclear that he thinks forming beliefs in this way is reliable. It may simply be that we have a brute instinct to think in a way that insures we'll see the world as resulting from some human-like intelligence, and it's at least not clear that that isn't a debunking account of the plausibility of theism. (For more support that this is a debunking explanation, see his The Natural History of Religion, where the explanations of various religious beliefs certainly seem to be one's that suggest those beliefs simply aren't plausible.)

David Hume made a reputation by writing on reason and its limits. The main thrust of the Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion is to question whether theological arguments for God that assign Him positive attributes (omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent, etc.) go beyond reason's limits in assigning these attributes. We watch Cleanthes (believer in theological arguments), Demea (believer more on faith) and Philo (disbeliever in theology's efficacy) hash out whether reason and experience alone give us reason to say anything whatever about God.

Hume explores all of the major arguments for God's existence. First, the a posteriori argument is explored; the argument that just as seeing a house gives us reason to assume an architect and builder, seeing the world should give us reason to infer a designer. Hume (through the skeptical voice of Philo) sees much wrong with this argument. Why? Because the reason we infer a builder for a house is because experience has shown us that houses have builders, thus when we see a house, we assume that, like other houses we've seen, this one too has a builder. But experience does not tell us that where there is a world, there is a designer. The leap is extra-experiential. Further, even if we DID infer a designer, why infer just one? Houses have construction crews of multiple people; if we analogize between the house and the world, then why not infer that the world, too, might have infinite creators? (And why infer that the world's creator is omnipotent, if all that is needed to create something is to be more powerful than the thing created - no more, no less?)

Next, we go through the a priori argument - the argument from first cause. Hume (Philo) is quick to point out the obvious flaw with this. If everything needs a cause, then what caused God? If God is said to be eternally existing, then why couldn't the natural world - rather than God - be thought eternal instead? And further, why is a infinite chain of causes and effects so unimaginable, anyhow? (Isn't it just as sensical as an eternal God itself not caused?)

Lastly, Philo brings up the argument from evil. In a nutshell, Philo suggests that while theology sees all the perfections of the world, proclaiming them clear evidence of remarkable design, theologians dismiss or downplay the imperfections. If God is said to all-good Himself, then why did he create humans with such flaws? (one assumes that an all-powerful, all-good God could have avoided those errors).

Still, the main thrust of this book is that Philo, far from challenging whether God exists, challenges theologies capacity to assign ANY characteristics to God by reason and experience alone. Hume does a good job not only in outlaying arguments as to why reason is not capable of knowing a thing about God, but also in making believable dialogues (compared to Plato, whose characters are all made to be one-dimensional foils for "Socrates.") As in so many other areas, Hume was a pioneer in the realm of the philosophy of God. This book furnishes strong proof of that!

David Hume, a philosopher of the period often classified as British Empiricism, is the intellectual associate of philosophers John Locke and George Berkeley. Born in Edinburgh in 1711, he attended the University of Edinburgh but did not graduate. He went to France during his 20s, and spent time there working on what would become his most famous work, 'An Enquiry into Human Understanding', first published under the title 'Treatise of Human Nature'. However, Hume was a prolific writer, and dealt with many areas of philosophy, including politics and ethics, epistemology, and metaphysics. He wrote in the area of history as well, and had a politic career as British ambassador to France and a post as a minister in the government for a few years. His final work, 'Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion', was published posthumously in 1779, although work had begun on it as early as the 1750s.

Hume was very concerned about rationality. Hume was never publicly and explicitly an atheist, but his rational mind, concerned about sensory and intelligible evidence, led him to question and doubt most major systems of religion, including the more general philosophical sense of religion and proofs of the existence of God. The primary arguments in his 'Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion' deal with the Argument from Design, and the Cosmological Argument. There is an assumed distinction here between natural religion and revealed religion, an especially important distinction in the Enlightenment and post-Enlightenment philosophical structure.

- Natural Religion and Revealed Religion -
Natural religion is the idea that we come to know and understand God (and, consequently, what God wants or expects of us, if anything) simply from nature and our sensory perceptions, as well as our interpretations (emotion and rational) of this kind of understanding. From very early in his writing career, Hume attacked the idea of natural religion and most of its conclusions, drawing a sharp line between what we can actually know and what ends up being fanciful extrapolations based on other-than-rational ideas and evidence. Revealed religion is primary what most religions base themselves upon - the burning bush to Moses, the resurrection and post-resurrection appearances to the Apostles, the Buddha's enlightenment under the tree - these are examples of revelation. While Hume does take on the idea of revealed religion in his other works, this particular text does not concern itself with that topic, and stays in the domain of addressing natural religion.

- The Argument from Design -
Arguments from Design have always had a strong appeal to believers within religious frameworks; they have often been used as tools of evangelism, as attempts to show that beyond the revealed doctrines, the very nature of things points to a creator. In very short order, the Argument from Design in Hume's newly-industrial time might have read like this:

- Machines are designed by beings with intelligence.
- The world and the universe it is in resembles a machine.
- Therefore, the world must have been created by means of intelligent design.

This is an argument by analogy, and is convincing to some, but often more convincing to those already inclined to believe in the existence of God.

- The Cosmological Argument -
The Cosmological Argument is at once both more subtle and more simple. The most simple way of stating it would be that God is the 'first cause' of everything. If everything has to have a cause (even the whole universe), then that first cause must be God. In the twentieth century era of thinking of a universe that began with a Big Bang, it seemed to some that the Cosmological Argument was confirmed.

Hume would have been familiar with Leibniz's more subtle form of the Cosmological Argument, which argues for a world of infinite contingent causes. However, there has to be something outside of this system of infinite causes that produced the series - thus, even in a universe with no set beginning or ending, there would still need to be an overarching cause.

- Hume's Arguments -
Hume argues on many levels. His first criticism of the Argument from Design is that this analogy (as are most arguments from analogy) is faulty and not exact; we have no idea if the universe is like a machine. Even if it was, machines are often designed and built by several designers - why argue for one God rather than several? How do we know that matter and the universe don't have their own, internal self-organising principles?

With regard to the Cosmological Argument, the argument is a little more strained. Hume argues that, in any series of causality, once one knows about each cause, it makes no sense to inquire beyond the sequence of causes to some other effect. This is a very Empirical argument, to be sure, and while perhaps not entirely satisfying, it still has merit in philosophy to this day.

- Hume's Structure -
This is a dialogue, set up in the classical way of people talking with each other about the subjects. Hume draws primarily from Cicero, whose work 'On the Nature of the Gods' uses characters of the same names. However, whereas Cicero was concerned about the nature of the Gods (their attributes, powers, etc.) and not their existence, it is the very existence of God that occupies Hume's thoughts.

Hume, despite many years of work on this text, probably never quite thought it was finished. He left the work to Adam Smith (the noted economist, and friend of Hume in Edinburgh), who also thought the arguments against the existence of God were too strong, and likely too damaging to Hume's overall reputation. The tug-of-war over the publication makes for interesting reading in and of itself.

These are important arguments, worthy of discussion and dialogue in philosophy classes, theology classes, and among others who ponder the existence of God.

This short and artfully written book was published after Hume's death. Hume did not wish to experience the controversy engendered by the arguments advanced in the book. It is likely as well that Hume was concerned also with offending some of the moderate Presbyterian clergy who were his personal friends and had been his partisans in other controversies. This book is primarily an attack on the idea that the exercise of reason and logic provides support for religion, and particularly that application of reason leads to strong evidence for the existence of a beneficient God. This line of thought had become particularly popular among liberal theologians in the first half of the 18th century and was a widely held notion among Enlightenment intellectuals across Europe and North America. This idea is still widely held today and can be seen in the writings of the so-called 'intelligent design' advocates of creationism. Hume's criticisms, then, are not only of historic interest but continue to have relevance to our contemporary lives.

The Dialogues are constructed as a 3 cornered argument between three friends. Demea, a man upholding revealed religion against the idea that reason provides support for the existence of God. Cleanthes, an advocate of natural religion. Philo, a skeptical reasoner who attacks the positions held by Demea and Cleanthes. For those who like Hume's sprightly 18th century style, this is a fun book to read. Hume artfully divides some of his strongest arguments between Cleanthes and Philo, and gives the Dialogues the real sense of a dispute among 3 intelligent friends. Philo is generally taken to represent Hume's positions but Cleanthes articulates some strong arguments and provides some of the best criticisms of Demea's fideism. Much of the book is devoted to attacking the argument from design, which Cleanthes attempts to defend against assaults from Philo and Demea. In many ways, the argument from design is the major idea of those supporting the natural religion approach to existence of God. Hume's critique is thorough and powerful. It even includes an anticipation of Darwin's idea's of selection, though the basis for Hume's critique is primarily epistemological. In the later parts of the book, Hume attacks also the comsological argument for the existence of God, though this discussion is relatively brief and a bit confusing. Hume's analysis is consistent broadly with much of his philosophical work. In many ways, his great theme was the limitations of reason, and this book is an example of his preoccupation with the relatively limited role of reason in establishing certain facts about the universe. He finishes with short criticisms of the idea that religion is needed for a stable and well ordered society and defends the usefullness of skeptical reasoning.

It is important to view the Dialogues as part of a critique of religion that Hume sustained in several works. His Natural History of Religion, the On Miracles section of the Enquiry Concerning Human Understacing, and other essays comprise a broad criticism of religion. Other pillars of religion, such as the existence of miracles and revelation, are criticized in his other work. While Hume denied being an atheist and was apparently disturbed by the dogmatic atheism of French philosophes he met in Paris, he was certainly not religous in any conventional sense.

This is a short and very readable book but the power of its arguments are totally out of proportion to its length.

This darling story is both a retelling of Rumpelstiltskin and a sequel, dealing with the idea that the miller's daughter married Rumpelstiltskin instead of the King. Years later, their daughter is brought back to the palace in order to do the same task as her father. Fortunately, she's just as clever. This story has a nice moral without being preachy and adorable illustrations. Very fun way to tell Rumpelstiltskin.

I loved this story. I still cry sometimes as I read the ending. the artwork is fun and interesting to look at. The story is about how this clever girl teaches the king about how he can find happiness by helping out his people instead of focusing on making more gold. I love reading this to my little girl. She is 18 months and asks for it. I don't know how much of it she gets but I certainly think children younger than 4 can really enjoy this book.

This inspiring take on Rumpelstiltskin is fabulous. Stories that model awesome choice making inspire people to make good choices. I love to read this story to my kids. I love the message that family is more important than vanity and worldly glory.

This children's story is 29 un-numbered pages in a large format. The cover size is 9 x 12 inches. It is well illustated with large, full-color illustrations.

It is a delightful retelling of the story of Rumpelstiltskin. In this version, the miller's daughter finds Rumpelstiltskin more attractive than the greedy king, and escapes with him to take up a new life on a farm. But, later, the king discovers their daughter, and kidnaps the daughter to try to force her to spin his straw into gold.

The daughter is certainly not attracted to a greedy old king in his dotage, expecially one that her mother had already rejected when he was younger. But the daughter has plans of her own for rescuing the kingdom, and she is a lot smarter than the king.

Like many good children's stories, this one has gone out of print. One could hope that the publisher will reissue this one.

I *love* this book! And so does my 3 year old daughter. The artwork is beautiful and so wonderful to look at. The story is *awesome* and just great for little girls [and boys!].

The author has a superb wit and a gift for storytelling. This has quickly become one of our very favorites and my daughter spends lots of time now pretending to be "Rumplestiltskin's Daughter" [who also had a name!]. I'm very happy with the impact this tale has had on her sense of what it is to be a woman.

This tale encourages girls to be clever and self sufficient without being tedious or overbearingly feminist. [And without being anti-male]. I can't recommend this book highly enough!

I bought this book because I've enjoyed John DiLeo's other books for their informed, but casual, approach to movie love. At a time when so many movie books are either earnestly academic (you know, political readings of gender performance in Nikkatsu gangster movies of the 60s,) or infinitely culty-geeky (do I really need the whole history of Philippine horror movies?), DiLeo assumes the existence of a readership that is, like him, informed and serious, but not obsessive-compulsive, and in it for the entertainment.
The book is divided into eight chapters, each devoted to a separate genre. (For the record, the eight genres are "Musicals Written Directly For The Screen," "Film Noir and Variations," "Love Stories," "Westerns," "Fantasy and Horror," "War," "Vintage Comedy," and the vague catch-all "Life and Times in America," which basically means "drama." The focus is exclusively American, but the time frame is from the silent era to the present. The presumption is that you've already seen the rote classics, and he therefore offers five movies in each genre that he feels have received insufficient attention, and that you therefore might have reasonably overlooked.
You can agree or disagree with the choices, but none are eccentric, deliberately provocative, or contrived to display mere cleverness. The real joy of this book, though, is in the wealth of background information. DiLeo will, for example, in describing "Comanche Station," give an overview of Randolph Scott's career, the placement of his "amiability and lean beauty" in two decades worth of decent but unnoteworthy roles in diverse genres, as a way of positioning the surprise of his late-career flowering in the films of Budd Boetticher, and their collaboration on seven morally complex westerns. Being a movie fan, DiLeo doesn't fail to mention the final triumph of the comic hommage to Scott in "Blazing Saddles." This precise positioning and career review is done not only for stars and directors, but screenwriters, cinematographers, character actors, even the evolution of genre conventions themselves. And it's presented in a chatty, highly readable style. The net effect is that "Screen Savers" is like an encyclopedia in friendly conversation.
I expect that I'll be using this book as a reference work for a long time to come. It is, I think, DiLeo's best book yet.

This book is a joy to read. Aside from John Dileo's amazing scope of knowledge about film, he is a terrific writer. Dileo has an uncanny ability to fully and clearly describe story lines, performances and a variety of other details about each movie. I guarantee that anyone who reads this book will come away wanting to see most, if not all, of the movies discussed here so eloquently.

Having purchased Mr. DiLeo's previous books, I was delighted to discover he had a new one on the shelves. After planning some time off for the holidays, I overnighted this book -- eager to reacquaint myself with this author's clever and keen insight into classic motion pictures. By the time Christmas came, I had gobbled it up -- cover to cover. And... what a surprise to see my co-worker bought the very same book for me at this year's Secret Santa. I didn't let on that I had already purchased it but loved that fact that he was so eager to tell me that "SCREEN SAVERS is the type of book that all the TCM watchers should love!" Do yourself a favor and buy John DiLeo's new book.

I was thoroughly delighted to read John DiLeo's third book, Screen Savers.

His quirky takes on actors and directors are refreshing and novel. He opens new insights when viewing and reviewing films that have been forgotten or have never received the accolades they deserved.

Mr. DiLeo has a wonderful way with words, a lovely sense of humor and a pleasant and breezy style.

Screen Savers makes for terrific reading whether sitting in front of a fireplace on a cold evening or while enjoying an iced tea on a summery afternoon.

I highly recommend Screen Savers to any movie buff or would-be movie buff. It opens new paths to understanding the magic of film and the skills of the actors and directors involved.

Netflix should send a thank you note to Mr. DiLeo for his artful awakening of our appreciation for some half-remembered and some totally forgotten films.

I saw Seven Brides for Seven Brothers for the first time after reading about it in John DiLeo's Screen Savers. I would not have bothered to see it had I not first read DiLeo's analysis and insights regarding this underappreciated film. His essay led me to a much fuller understanding of its beauty, craft and surprising depth, making me want to see what I had previously considered an old-fashioned and uninteresting musical. Upon completing each chapter, I find myself scanning the upcoming programming for Turner Classic Movies, hoping they will soon be showing one of DiLeo's selections, so that I can use my new "behind the scenes" information while watching the film. It is clear that the movies the author selects for rediscovery are on a personal list of favorites, they moved or inspired him. But while he clearly loves movies, the tone never sinks to that of a fawning fan. He backs up his choices with detailed analyses and thorough research, convincing the reader of their rightful rank among films that should be reexamined. The joy of this book is that he educates the reader while imparting some of his obvious infatuation and love for his subject. And like any satisfyingly juicy critical discussion, the author allows a dialogue to develop with his reader. You may even find yourself disagreeing with him about a favorite star or director (c'mon, Lana Turner wasn't that untalented) and that is part of the fun. This book has rekindled in this reader a new enthusiasm for older and "gently used" movies. I can't wait for my first viewings of The Man Who Laughs and The Iron Giant.

Patricia and Stanley have created a beautiful story of life and love, offering many inspiring possible answers to humankind's many mysteries. Is this a big part of the UFO or alien mystery? Of the origins of our existence? How comforting and uplifting to read this book and feel its love and sincerity. It is such a pleasure to find it written so well, a treat to all the senses, I savored every paragraph. A few years ago I "dreamed" I was on a ship with people whom I loved and was so ecstatic at the reunion after so long apart from them. I cried out to stay, not to be made to return to earth. This dream haunted me for days and I remember it vividly to this day. For me, Ships of Song spoke directly to my heart, urging me to remember more......the oneness of All That Is.

After "The Phantom Tollbooth," this was one of my very favorite books as a kid. Super dark and inventive revenge fantasies for children.

This is a great children's book that I still love now that I've grown up. The story follows a kid named Skinny Malinky and his friends through assorted misadventures at school that lead to an all-out war between the kids and the teachers. The book is very creative and very funny!

Shark-infested rice pudding! Just like mom used to make! This book should be required reading.

I've always remembered reading this book, a surreal and really rather sinister and apocalyptic tale of kids on the run in the name of individuality. The premise bears a lot of similarity to the 1998 movie Disturbing Behavior, with parents zombifying their kids in order to make them behave, but minus the "mature themes". If anything, one could say it was like Disturbing Behavior meets Logan's Run, written for sixth-graders. It's a little-known, but definite, gem.

I first remember noticing this book in the first few weeks of seventh grade, sitting in the back of my English teacher's small library. Somehow, the concept of a group of kids rebelling against the petty teachers and mindless rules of the school appealed to me. Gee, I could never figure out why. The whole book is odd, though. Stanley Kiesel seems to have created a whole universe of his own yet he never fully lets us in on it all. The book's climax and coda shows us these new kids' societies Kiesel imagines -- the Bookworms, of course, being the utterly coolest. But my big question is, among all the wars and the subsequent stories afterwards, were are the parents?

Great book. Basic history of the depression days and the hardships of families and conditions that prevailed. Pictures were very good and the text was easy to read and detailed. Highly recommend for anyone interested in this time period.

My dad was one of these depression era Okie kids and this book helps me understand him. On the way to California in 1937 they found work (50 cents a day and a quart of milk) in New Mexico and ended up staying there.

My 10 year old daughter was required to read a non-fiction book and create a project for her 5th grade English class. She is an avid reader of fiction, but was not enthusiastic about reading non-fiction. This marvelous book by Jerry Stanley has changed my daughter and her reluctance in this area. She was moved by the story of these Dust Bowl migrants who came to California to find a better life and their struggle to move forward from adversity. Mr. Stanley's book is excellent. While written for young readers, he does not write down to them. Instead he brings the young reader to his level. The photographs by noted artists bring further dimension to this stellar work. My daughter could not put it down.

This book is a beautiful testiment to the human spirit, and the resilancy of the American spirit.
It is also the story of taking a chance on people that other's find useless.
A beautiful book and a beautiful story.

this book is an excellent companion to the historical ficiton book "Bud, Not Buddy." By reading aloud sections of Children of the Dustbowl, teachers could build some of the background knowledge that would help children understand how the daily lives of the average person changed as a result of the Great Depression and the 5-year drought in the Midwest.
Given the devastation of Hurriicane Katrina, this book also offers insight on what can happen when large numbers of people must migrate because of weather-related disasters.

I've read dozens of WWII books and this is one of the best! There is nothing quite like reading about Great Americans' experiences in their own words. They answered the call, did their duty and risked their lives every day to protect their Country and our way of life. Now everyone can find out what it was like in graphic detail. This is the first book written by Brooks Mitchell that I have read and I look forward to reading his other works.

My father was the pilot in this book and he passed away prior to it's being published. I can only read a few pages at a time as the emotion of the events wells up very quickly. It is a wonderful look into one airplane crew from different individual perspectives as they faced each mission not knowing what they were to encounter. My father would be proud!! They were good Americans applies to the ones who gave their lives and the ones who made it to tell their stories. God Bless You

My Dad is 79. He was in the Army Air Corp and Air Force from 1944 to 1949. He now spends much of his day reading and, on occasion, still enjoys assemblng a WWII model airplane. He does not have the same eye for detail and the dexterity he once had, but the pleasure of his hobby remains. I gave my Dad Kipling's Error III as a gift. His emotional response and heartfelt appreciation was my gift. He enjoyed the sensitive writing style and personal diaries with a tear in his eye and a flood of memories. We are deeply grateful to Dr. Brooks Mitchell and Capt. Lloyd Mitchell for kindly and respectfully honoring and remembering our veterans. Thank you.

Reviewed by Paige Lovitt for Reader Views (3/06)

Brooks Mitchell, PhD, wrote this biography about his father, a B-17 navigator of Kipling's Error III, and his crew's 25 combat missions that took place over Europe during World War II. Mitchell gathered his information from diaries written by his father and four of his crewmen. He also used a taped interview with his father that his daughter created while she was doing a high school paper. There are also vintage photographs that bring the stories more vividly alive.

Through this story, Brooks achieves his goal of preserving the experiences of these crewmen during the time of war. The reader learns about the difficult times that these men experienced while they were stationed in Snetterton-Heath England. "Kipling's Error III" provides excellent insights into what these brave men had to sacrifice during their time of serving our country. Because the information was taken from some of the crewmen's personal diaries, the reader gets to see life as it really was during this time. Every aspect of the men's lives is covered.

This book provides so much more rich detail, than a traditional history book. When Captain Lloyd Mitchell wrote in his diary, "They were good Americans," he was referring to friends of his who were killed during a raid into the Third Reich. He had to help clean up their remains. By learning about the war from the experiences of these men, the reader is able to see the full range of emotions that they had to deal with while they were at war and then the personal issues they faced being so far away from their family and friends.

I highly recommend this book to World War II fans. Reading through the diary entries and seeing the photographs will really make you feel like you are present. Passing on this story also an important way to preserve this historical experience of American men who were truly, "good Americans."

Drawing from flight crew diaries and enhanced with vintage photographs, Kipling's Error III: They Were Good Americans is the story of the men who flew a B-17 Flying Fortress on twenty-five successful raids over enemy occupied Europe. Striking out from their base in Snetterton-heath, England, these were men who were put through every possible human emotion in a bloody and savage aerial war that included bravery, terror, duty, patriotism, love and hate. The author, Brooks Mitchell , is the eldest of three sons of Captain Lloyd Mitchell who served as the navigator of Kipling's Error II and has provided an invaluable contribution to the growing library of World War II aviation combat histories. Kipling's Error III is impressively informative, exceptionally well edited and written, very highly recommended reading for military buffs, and a core addition to academic and community library World War II Military Studies reference collections.

This book focuses on communication in marriage and has basic principles
that are easy to follow. It also discusses key areas where there may be
problems to resolve. It is based on sound Christian principles that apply to other relationships as well.

No matter how long you have been married, you must always remember that God comes first. This book reminds us that a healthy, Godly marriage works in this order: 1)God, 2) Marriage 3) Self 4) Children 5) All Else. Without Him, a marriage is doomed. This book has allowed me and my Wife to address minor and major issues using God's direction. This is actually a second publishing, with the first being mostly secular. The authors have taken scripture and make it very clear that God wants marriage to be Spirirtually based. No matter what issue you may be having in your marriage, using God's directives can heal all wounds - past and present. As a Chaplain and a Counselor, I have found this to be the ultimate guide to healing a realtionship. I now recommend this book to all my clients, regardless of their religious beliefs. It provides scripture as an adjunct to the core message of each topic, and is very easy to follow. The authors have written it so that one may read a section regarding their specific problem, or it can be read in the order it was written. If you are yearning to have a Godly marriage - THIS IS THE MANUAL YOU NEED. Peace and God Be With You.

This book has helped us mend our marriage and grow to better communicate and understand each other. I highly recommend it for engaged, newlyweds, or people who have been married for years. God has truly blessed our marriage through this book.

My husband and I both liked the book because it gives practical ways to communicate, which can cross over in all aspects of life. It gives helpful, concrete tools to use in relationships.

This book, along with the non-Christian version, Fighting for your Marriage, is great! This is great marriage enrichment stuff and helps so much with communication, as well as increasing fun in your marriage. Great for small groups. [...]. As a mental health counselor, I use the tools in this book with my clients and highly recommend it! Also at the PREP website is a list of PREP instructors if you need more individualized help.

I am a book collector. Out of all of my children's books, this is on my top 10. It is such a cute story and sweet. I adore the pictures. I wish that there were more books about Moe. Buy this your kids will love it.

Because my daughter is only 1, the illustrations are paramount in chosing a bedtime story for her. A great story for the little ones to look at, and as they grow older, a nice story as well.

I have to tell you, this book is FABULOUs!! I love reading it to my daughter, and she loves to sit quitely and listen, or help me tell the story. The illustrations are gorgeous, and the characters Moe and Arlene are completely likeable. Their tale is a real inspiration to everyone who needs a little pick-me-up. I only wish that there were more adventures of Moe and Arlene to read aloud and enjoy. Please make more!!

Moe the Dog in Tropical Paradise is a wonderful book. I liked it because Moe uses his imagination to find something to do over the weekend. He pretends to be in a tropical paradise. If you can't go there in real life you can be like Moe and pretend.
He shares his great ideas with his friend. I like to share my ideas with my friends too.

Michelle Anderson

Moe the Dog in Tropical Paradise is a wonderful book. I liked it because Moe uses his imagination to find something to do over the weekend. He pretends to be in a tropical paradise. If you can't go there in real life you can be like Moe and pretend. He shares his great ideas with his friend. I like to share my ideas with friends too.