Kansas Books

I've only made a couple of the recipes. My spice cake came out great, but beware that a lot of the recipes produce many servings. I ended up throwing away most of the spice cake. I don't give my dog frequent treats. I like the tips they have in the book.

Bow wow! (that's hello in doggy language)I love everything about this book. The way it is written, the ease of the recipes and the naturalness in the ingredients. I have made the Peanut Brindle and Grandpaws Sunday Dawg dinner and all are delicious according to my two boys that lick their bowls. The title of the menu items are witty and cute. What I like too is that the book gives special occasion menus and menus for special needs dogs. The authors should open up a doggie restaurant serving not just bakery items but other recipes that are in the book!

If you bought this book for personal use then it's a great book but if you bought it to help with a home business, many of the recipes will not last long. A lot of the recipies I didn't think I would use for my personal pet either. But just to say, I like shopping at their stores.

This book has a pretty good variety of recipes. They are fairly easy and so far, my dogs have loved every one I've tried. Throughout the book, there are many interesting tips and entertaining anecdotes. Overall, a good buy in my opinion.

I recently purchased this book. Like others, I originally heard about Three Dog Bakery because of the book 'Amazing Gracie,' by the founders of Three Dog Bakery. We don't have a local Bakery so I thought it would be nice to try our four dogs on some of the recipes the Bakery suggested.

My dogs, in a word, SCARFED down everything I made. We've done a number of the cookie recipes thus far - all to the tail wagging delight of our four furry friends. We frequent a local dog park and not a dog turned up his or her nose at these treats.

In addition to the fun, easy and healthy treats and meals in this book there are numerous entertaining and informative snippets of information for the dog lover.

I would recommend this book to others who want to offer a healthy alternative to pre-packaged dog food and treats.

This is a well written book and provides both a depth and breadth of understanding into the development of indian boarding schools established in the 1800s.

This was a pretty good book about American Indians and the whole boarding school experience. David Adams really brought the experience to life. The only downside to this book is that I think he tried to cover too much. He covered a great span of time and the book was pretty long and got a little slow at times.

I read this for a class and enjoyed it very much. It is one of the best I have read for Native Studies. There are many facts and other pieces of information that I had not found in other books.

This all too true account of the reeducation process which American government officials euphemistically had Indian children go through is very chilling. It is maddening to believe there were people in Washington who actually considered such treatment of kids to be 'good policy'.

While reading through this book, I was gennuinely driven to tears. The tactics which were used on the kids were what was 'savage'. Ethnocentrism and racism kept the United States government and its representatives from seeing the Indians as a civilized and advanced society.

The primary and secondary sources which David Wallace Adams cites emphasize that the 'pupils' were not naive and passive victims of these abuses. Predating the American Indian Movement of the 1960's and 1970's, they resisted the 'education' which these schools were trying to shove down their own throats.

This book was recommended to me by my academic advisor, as it is considered an important and influential treatise on the subject of Native American education. David Wallace Adams, in his groundbreaking book, "Education for Extinction: American Indians and the Boarding School Experience, 1875-1928," shows how the case for education was made. First, Euro-Americans believed that the older generation of Indians was incapable of becoming civilized and were too attached to their old ways to change. The youthfulness of Indian children meant they could still be saved.

Secondly, education quickened the process of cultural evolution from savagism to civilization. Isolating the children, many felt, would help to reduce the influence of their tribes and their traditional cultures. Lastly, education helped prepare the Indians for self-sufficiency.

I really enjoy this book as it is extremely well written. Adams, unlike some historians, did not use too many jargons and his writing is easy to understand. Adams also provided background information for readers who are not proficient in this subject matter. In addition, "Education for Extinction" was heavily researched and well-documented.

This is a must read book for all of the people who interact on the net with "FRIENDS".

This story blew my mind. I had just finished the book when I stopped for fuel at the NM/AZ state line on I-40. There was a state police computer printout hanging on the door, warning women against chatting with men on the internet because of the "internet slavemaster." The state police (NM) were asking for any information in connection to this internet entity. I couldn't believe it.

Then, when I arrived in Holbrook, AZ, I ran into four highway patrolmen at a truckstop diner and asked them about the notice. We engaged in an hour-long conversation about how a predator like this can disguise himself as an upstanding member of the community and keep everybody fooled. We had the book out and several people seemed mesmerized by our discussion of this story. It has that effect! It is just so unbelievable that people are astounded.

If you have not read this book, get it! This man was the first to harness the internet for serial killing. Boy, it will drive home the fact that there is no safe ground anymore. If you have children, you will be concerned about what they are doing online. It will make you look at your computer in a whole new light. It will also make you start wondering about all those upstanding citizens that you know so well ... or do you really know them at all?

There is a flip side to this story - the world of S&M and the women that were surfing for a "master." This man could not have lured them if they had not been presenting themselves as victims. That is where the game is so dangerous - you just never know when it is going to get out of hand. I would think that it is not something you would readily trust to a stranger. I think that is the part of this story that astounds people the most. Why would a woman readily place herself into the role of slave to a complete stranger?

The author has done a fabulous job of presenting the facts in a flowing narrative that keeps you reading. I couldn't put the book down until I finished it. I can't imagine what he could have done to improve it. It was outstanding!

I first came across this book as it was listed in another reviewer's listmania list. Given its lofty reviews, I was excited when I finally came across a used copy of this out-of-print book. For the most part, the book did not disappoint.

John Edward Robinson may go down as the first internet serial killer. However, the route to his crime was less than conventional. From fraud, theft, to various other scams, Robinson fits the profile of a career criminal. It was only when his BDSM lifestyle began to spiral out of control that his criminal world closed in on him. Like many criminals, his crimes became sloppy toward the end of his run. Even if Robinson appears reasonably clean early in the book, the search warrants toward the end lend an explosive image to the crimes.

The one major flaw I saw with the book is its inability to finish the story. The book ends with the case going to trial. Why end the book before the story is finished? I needed to do an internet search to learn of the court rulings.

John Robinson was a businessman, Eagle Scout and Man of the Year. Very few people knew the real John Robinson. Three quarters of the book deals with the prior crimes committed by John. He was always setting up new businesses and trying to get people to invest. Each time the police caught him, he would start up another business.
While only a quarter of the book dealt with his new found internet lifestyle. The book was well written except for the ending, when the reader is left wonder what actually happened.

Living in the Kansas City area I was particularly interested in the John Robinson case and followed it avidly. Glattt has done an excellent job in recounting the case and his research is first class. He also goes further and breaks new facts on the case which have never come to light before. I was very impressed by his writing style and attanetion to detail. I would recommend this to all true crime fans and have done so. This one is way up there with In Cold Blood.

I love this book. I recommend it to all my clients. The information presented is easy to understand, easy to use, and just plain reader-friendly. "Natural Highs" gives people the ability to take back control of their moods and their life safely and effectively. Read it, use it, and dare to be happy!
Mary Ann Michels, Certified Hypnotherapist & EFT Practitioner

Once again I reached for Dr. Cass' book today. I've had it for about six months and it hasn't sat closed for any two weeks in a row. I've tried several items listed and found that some worked and some didn't. One of the greatest joys is replacing a pill or supplement with real food. I'd rather eat fish than a tablespoon of fish oil!

It took time to realize that the book is written for a general audience, not just for me. Now I'm working through her suggestions methodically, patiently weeding out those that aren't right for me and keeping those that are. For instance, I discovered that high potency vitamin B "complete" supplements work well with SAMe. On the other hand, valerian only caused bad dreams.

Used in conjunction with Chris Carmichael's "Food for Fitness" and some great web resources, I find that I have both high energy and a great attitude towards life and my health.

I don't know about you, but I get tired of health & nutrition books that go on and on about technical details without supplying any real information I can use. That is why I have appreciated the direct approach taken in Natural Highs. The authors clearly explain how to feel better and why it works. The descriptions of neurotransmitters and brain chemistry are sufficient without becoming tiresome. The supplement recommendations are candid and well balanced. Important techniques such as breathwork and meditation are also covered. This book is readable and even entertaining. If you are curious about natural ways to relax or improve your mood, give it a try!

There is definitely some interesting information in this book, but the use of biased anecdotes and several totally false claims make it difficult to determine how much of the book can actually be trusted.

Overall it wasn't worth buying because I had to spend many hours doing my own research on the authors' claims. As always books that rely on anecdotes to back up claimed benefits should be viewed with suspicion.

The advice in this book worked for me, it has many options to improve over-all health!

Jake McPherson, 39 is the brother of Cord from HH 431 The Wedding Promise.
Was so glad that Jake finally got his story told.

Jake was in a wheelchair and has moved out from their ranch when Cord married Rachel Sinclair [more stories].
He married Lorena and they had a son, Jason who is now nine.
Lorena died just about 2 years ago, Jake and Jason are still grieving.
Jake is living like a hermit, having torn up the ramp built for him to get out of the house. Jason is showing an ill temper to get the attention of his father.

All of this attitude gets dumped on Alicia Merriweather, 30 as she is Jason's teacher. She considers herself on the shelf as far as marriage is concerned. She considers herself too tall, too buxom, too well built and just too plain.

Jake was well on his way to becoming a concert pianoist before Lorena died. Now he won't have anything to do with the concert piano. He refuses to leave the house. He has refused so far to open the curtains and let some sunlight in.

Alicia, with all she has heard of Jake, decides to beard the lion in his den for the sake of his son. She soon learns that Jake apparently enjoys the sass that she gives him.

This is the story of a woman who refuses to give into bad manners although she has to bear emotional hurt. A man who lets fly with his temper but eventually makes amends for his hurtful words. And a boy who just wants his father's attention.

Cord and Rachel show up several time to help the couple even though Jake seems to resent it. We get to see a strong love the brothers have for each other.

An exceedingly excellent story - without all that trashy PMS - heart-warming - even the sheriff is nice.

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED [LIKE ALL OF HER BOOKS] there must be about 5 or 6 to this family run. start with HH 431 - 543 - 556 - 699 - HQN- Redemption + Haven. All excellent.

With effortless flow and emotional narration, Carolyn Davidson delivers REDEMPTION - a story full of profound tenderness and deep emotion delving deep into the heart of the human spirit.

Jake McPherson, is an embittered and angry man - he has the right to live as a hermit and a recluse in his boarded up house with his nine year old son Jason. He has lost much in his life - the Civil War put him in wheelchair and robbed him of his legs as well as losing his beloved wife to pneumonia.

Alicia Merriweather is the town schoolteacher. At 30, she is a no-nonsense, openly spoken, stout woman who realizes that nine year old Jason is belligerent and badly behaved due to the lack of regard from his father. Allowed to run wild, Jason has no discipline and Alicia is about to put a stop to it - no student of hers is going to disrupt her classroom. Sure as you please, she waltzes into Jake's house and into his life, by standing toe-to-toe with him and lets him know exactly what is going on and what he has to do to fix it!! The nerve of the woman!

But soon, Jake realizes that he needs more than a woman to keep his house clean and cook their meals. He decides that Alicia could be the right woman to be a mother to his son - so he asks her to marry him. The battle of wills continues as Alicia is constantly keeping him on his toes. Little does he realize that Alicia is the breath of fresh air his house and his life has badly needed - he comes to realize how much he cares for her as his life slowly starts to change in ways that he never knew would resurface.

With flawless execution and a simple but emotional narrative, this is the story of how a woman heals a man's wounded heart and makes him whole. REDEMPTION will crawl right into your heart and will find a spot on your keeper shelf. Bravo Ms. Davidson, on a beautifully written novel that truly speaks to the heart!

This is the first Carolyn Davidson book I have read and I am hooked!!! I like the language used and she describes her settings and characters so well a visual is automatically in your head. I will find her other books.

I really enjoyed this book. Finally an interesting love interest. Having a man in a wheelchair trying to take care of his son is not a topic dealt with every day. I also enjoyed that our heroine is not a breath taking beauty and he learns to see her inner beauty as he falls in love with her. This is romance, to me, at its very best.

I have just finished reading this book after buying it this afternoon. I loved it!! I honestly cant express in words how good it was. Funny and romantic. Everything I want in a romance novel. I actually picked this book up by accident and never having read a Carolyn Davidson book, was a little leary. I will most definitely purchase more of her books in the near future!! WONDERFUL!

Among their many failings, U.S. history textbooks have often portrayed national sovereignty as a largely settled question following the revolutionary war, which was resurrected years later by southern states who wanted to hold slaves. What University of Alabama Professor Forrest McDonald shows in "States' Rights and the Union", is that states' rights infused the national debate of most issues in the first 100 years of the republic.

One of those issues on which McDonald provides a particularly interesting read is the issue of "internal improvements" (modern-day supporters call them "earmarks"; detractors "pork-barrel projects"). What has become commonplace today was once looked at as an unconstitutional extension of federal power. As part of the ongoing debate, McDonald chronicles the 1825 passage of a resolution by the South Carolina legislature which condemned "the taxing of the citizens in one state 'to make roads and canals for the citizens of another state.' Virginia adopted a similar resolution early in 1827, as did Georgia late in the year." Where would today's politicians be if they couldn't deliver for their constituents road and canals? (and bridges and buildings and museums and subsidies).

The book is filled with Supreme Court cases, which serves to reinforce McDonald's contention of the Court's centrality in the states' rights debate. Although today the Supreme Court is looked at with an almost sacred awe, it wasn't always that way. Indeed, McDonald notes in the epilogue that it was with the dismissal of 20th century southern segregationist laws that "the Supreme Court gained an enormous fund of moral capital in the rest of the country" which it used to consolidate its power. But due to the constant shuffle of Supreme Court Justices, the Court has been a sometime friend and othertime foe of states' rights.

The jackets says the book was "written in an accessible style", but demands some familiarity with U.S. History (which should disqualify about 75 percent of the American public). However, what McDonald has done is to write a consistent narrative of one of the most important and unique features of American democracy. Although the narrative ends in 1876, it is instructive background for many current debates in U.S. politics and the epilogue sets the stage for a much-needed sequel. In light of the extensive research McDonald put into the first 100 years of the states' rights debate, it would be fascinating to see him focus that same energy on the last 125, and especially the Rhenquist court.

The other reviews have fairly well covered the ground, save for the notion that the more background you bring to this book, the more sense it makes. I had just finished bios of Washington and JQA when I undertook this, thank heavens. The "meandering" criticism is, I think, misplaced. The author is simply trying to ball up the strings of attitudes, attitudes which shifted as quickly as regional economic interests.

The reviewer who asserts the book is a lightening rod for one's own opinions has a point. The past few generations have grown up with the notion that the federal government is "She who must be obeyed" (with apologies to Rumpole). But it ain't necessarily so, were it not for the fact that the feds have the guns and tanks and, as Nixon and Bush 43 have demonstrated, the willingness to use them on our own people. (Don't get edgy about Bush43 -- absolutely not in the same league with Kent State. B43 has merely run roughshod over the civil rights of all Americans in the name of protecting me from terrorism).

It had been unimaginable to me that the states would ever consider they need not obey federal law. Nor did my American History classes cause me to realize that various state factions have seriously courted secession many times. Once again, "A little learning is a dangerous thing," A. Pope. Are we about to swing back towards greater states' rights? I don't know. Certainly the current administration prefers an Imperial Presidency, but the SCt may, indeed, move towards a more balanced situation.

As the reviewers have implied, McDonald leaves one with the notion that the founding fathers had no consensus about how much power belonged where. I do not subscribe to the view that constitutional tensions were left present because our forebearers were prescient. Rather, their generation, like ours, had a wide diversity of viewpoints. As has happened many times with many laws, ambiguity has allowed for agreement, after which legislators could move on to something else.

There are no simple solutions, nor have there ever been. Politicians, from revolutionary to the current batch, pushing simplistic solutions have, when successful, succeeded in driving a wedge between regions. After reading this book, I am astonished that the US has not torn itself asunder. Little wonder the 18th century Brits did not expect the US to survive as a nation.

~States' Rights and the Union: Imperium in Imperio, 1776-1876~ is perhaps one of the best new contributions to the study of American constitutional history in recent years. Most history books portray the nature of sovereignty within the American body politic as being well-settled after 1787. In their mind, it was settled that the U.S. was to have a strong central government. This is reductionism at its best and history at its worst. The essence of a true federal regime has always been a diffusion of powers and a dual sovereignty, not a centralized unitary polity like France or the United Kingdom. The framers of the Constitution deliberatedly contemplated a general government with expressly enumerated powers. The contest over States Rights and the Union was almost inevitable, as the American polity was framed with an ingrained contradiction of dual sovereignty that was anathema to European conceptions of sovereignty. McDonald's book is fittingly subtitled Imperium in Imperio, which literally delineates supreme sovereignty within supreme sovereignty. Likewise, the Calvinist notion of man's innate depravity was more readily acceptable to framers who were weary and mistrustful of concentrated power. It was the springboard for fortifying Anglo-American traditions of bicameral legislatures, common law protections for the individual and adding more checks and balances. The framers rejected whimsical views about man's good nature espoused by Rousseau. "Free government is founded in jealousy," avowed Thomas Jefferson, "and not in confidence. It is jealousy and not confidence which prescribes limited constitutions, to bind down those whom we are obliged to trust with power..." Much to the chagrin of modern liberals, the crux of the American polity was the nature of its dual sovereignty coupled with its corporate liberty (i.e. institutions jealously guarding their prerogatives,) not its popular representation.

Forrest McDonald chronicles the political and constitutional history of the American polity in its first century from the time of the Constitutional Convention where the states in convention assented to the formation of the Union. All of the pivotal debates about the nature of the Union are addressed. McDonald pays special attention to contests that reached a groundswell during the administrations of Jefferson and Monroe over federal appropriations for internal improvements. The ensuing Congressional fights over the Bank of the United States, internal improvements, and tariffs would deepen the vexing question over the nature of sovereignty. James Madison brilliantly asserted that the Constitution gives the general government explicit "enumerated objects" of power, and Article I, Section 8 empowers Congress to finance "post roads," though no mention is made for subsidies to railroads or building canals. The original secessionist movement was lead by New England Federalists ironically, and McDonald chronicles the saga of the Hartford Convention. The High Federalists opposed the Louisiana Purchase, because it expanded the states and they argued that while the territory could be expanded that no new states should be added. Jefferson had serious reservations about the legality of the purchase in the absence of Constitutional Amendment, but found the deal too good to pass up. The controversies leading up to the War Between the States and southern secession are discussed. Moreover, the actions of the Supreme Court in shaping the debate over States' Rights and the Union are the subject of constant discussion for McDonald. Ultimately, the Clay-Webster-Lincoln conception of the Union would work to steadily supplant the conservative Madison-Calhoun-Hayne conception of the Union. The dictatorial Lincoln regime and Reconstruction regime could only serve to set the precedent for the New Deal exploits of FDR.

States' Rights is considered an archaic concept now and is often demeaned as a mere buzzword for segregationists. Nonetheless states' rights remains a monumental pillar of the American Republic that needs to be rediscovered and not forgotten. Madison's point is simple, the federal government has expressed powers and limitations, and if there are no limitations on what that government may do than the Tenth Amendment is turned on its nose and a relic of the horse and buggy era. Modern neoconservatives seem only to argue for a renewed commitment to federalism by shifting some powers back to the states on utilitarian grounds of efficiency rather than on constitutional grounds. If you like McDonald, I think books such as _Reassessing the Presidency: The Rise of the Executive State and the Decline of Freedom_ and _The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War_ are also worth considering. McDonald is more of a constitutional storyteller who withholds judgment; those books previously, however, tell it like it is.

States' Rights and the Union: Imperium in Imperio 1776-1876 written by Forrest McDonald is a very illuminating work on the vexing theme of States' Rights vs Union, a theme in American history and politics that has and will continue to elicite debate.

Forrest McDonald works both sides of the debate in this book and you'll find yourself straddling the fence here, wary of federal power or states' rights, as the Constitution gave the central government expansive powers, but it also legitimated the doctrine of states' rights, resulting in dual-sovereignty or as McDonald says, Imperium in Imperio, (sovereignty within sovereignty, supreme power within supreme power), or the division of power within a single jurisdiction. This inherent tension and uncertainty was, I think, intentionally written into the constitution to keep both sides honest. This debate seems to always keep the pot hot, only occasionally boiling over into contention.

McDonald has a pleasenly elegant narrative that is easily readable giving an insightful look at the delicate balance of dual-sovereignty. Taking us from the Federalist Era through the Jeffersonians to finally the Civil War and Reconstruction all the while giving the reader insight to the various positions each serving a purpose as authority between general and local seemed to sway in one direction or another, only to be upset anew and to move back toward the opposite position, but the contention never went away. The division of sovereignty was generally regarded as impossible, but only in America where political thinking underwent a fundamental transformation, bringing unparalleled and unprecedented constitution-making, and only until Americans devised a way of doing it, did it happen.

The Constitution did give the general government broad powers within a limited sphere and thereby institutionalized a system of divided sovereignty. Reading and understanding this book you'll find that you'll side and reside yourself as the debate goes on, from the states' righters as John Taylor and John Randolph argue the definition of tyranny is the concentration of power in some remote center, but the opposite side John Quincy Adams and Nicholas Biddle ardently argue for vigorous action at the center was vital if the nation was to fulfill its promise and its destiny among the family of nations.

This is a well balanced work of enlightenment for each position making point and counter-point and is well documented. This is a worthy read for those wanting to broaden their knowledge of why things are as they are in the United States... according to their Constitution, a form of government that empowers its people above all.

This book would be of interest if only for the fact that it serves as a lightening rod for the reader's preconceptions on the issues surrounding States' Rights. Read the reviews below and note that some of the reviewers tend to regard McDonald as an advocate for the States and some read him as an advocate for the Feds.
Readers will tend to find in this book evidence to support their own views. That should suggest that McDonald has succeeded in giving us a fairly objective history of the issue. I feel he has. Sort of.
The first part of the book does seem to meander. That is the nature of the beast. I have never read any comprehensive history of constitutional history that does not meander. Many different issues were argued during the first sixty years or so of our constitutional history using States Rights on one side or the other. I think you would be very hard pressed to name one major national figure in that time frame who did not argue both sides of the debate at different times in their lives or in regards to different issues. Madison, Hamilton, Jefferson, Jackson, Webster, Clay and Calhoun all are associated with one side or another on the issue yet all at some point in their careers argued the other side.
Individual states showed their flexibility on these issues as well. In the chapter on the period immediately preceding the Civil War, 'Dissolving the Union', McDonald notes that the North began to preach nullification while Southerners began to praise the Court.
The latter part of the book probably seems more focused because the issues were more focused and the positions of the players more dogmatic.
I suspect that most of us still find ourselves on both sides of the debate depending on which issue we are discussing. As an Oregonian, I have been annoyed recently by the Federal government trying to contravene the wishes of the people of my State in regards to the Death with Dignity Act. On many other issues, I have supported that same Federal government when it interfered with the laws of individual States, e.g., in the case of laws nationalizing voting rights. Now, before, y'all jump all over me for inconsistency, ask yourself in you are not in the same boat. And while you are at it, ask yourself if most political issues do not involve making a decision on more than one constitutional issue. And whether how much of a role that States' Rights play in our reaction to an issue depends on our feelings about the other constitutional issues involved.
Consider that the political and economic issues debated in this country have always had that type of complexity and I believe it will be clear why McDonald's history is not a nice flowing narrative.
While I think McDonald's history is useful, I find myself questioning some of his judgments. I think he has a tendency to make statements that are not supported by evidence. On p. 120 McDonald claims, 'Jackson brought such disrepute to his office that that vital function of the presidency could scarcely be performed again for the remainder of the century'. This strikes me as a wee bit of an overstatement.
I also find his handling of certain events to be questionable, e.g., the notorious caning of Charles Sumner by Preston Brooks. McDonald seems to feel that Sumner was malingering. Maybe. Maybe I would feel like malingering too if struck repeatedly on the head with a gutta-percha cane. In any case, I remain a little skeptical about McDonald as pure historian. But don't take my word for it. I am just some schmuck who reads a lot. Read one of his books and decide for yourself.
If the issue of the relative power of the States vis-a-vis the Federal government is of interest to you then this is a useful book. If you have a strong opinion you will find additional support for either side within these pages. If your opinion on these issues is unclear, this book should be of use in sorting out some of your ideas simply by the way you find yourself reacting to the various arguments.
One final note- in evaluating what happened to the South after the Civil War, it is important to also keep in mind the monumental and systematic terrorism that was unleashed on black people during this time. The reaction of Southerners to Reconstruction is probably the strongest argument for federal intervention in the political lives of the states. The protection of minorities from the majority was one of the main reasons Madison and others pushed for the writing and ratification of the Constitution. Which minority is the focus of that protection at whatever historical moment is one of the story lines of our constitutional history. It is altogether too easy to forget this when reading a book like this one. I cannot recommend highly enough Eric Foner's great book on Reconstruction as a general background to reading about the era.

Great book on the history of the presidency by the inimitable Professor McDonald. The book begins with how the framers were influenced by English law and the history of the executive (ie king and prime minister) up to that point in history. Realize that had there been no George Washington, the framers would have been reluctant to create an executive position that is now known as the presidency.

The American Presidency: An Intellectual History written by Forrest McDonald is a book with incisive analysis of political ideas which are found in the characteristics involving the Presidency of the United States. This book is well founded in the history and is solid in early hystory.

The presidency is given a thorough thought-provoking, with historical review, going over... leaving the reader with insight into the institution of the presidency. We are guided with a shrewd sense of political reality, making us understand what the presidency is all about. Reading this book will open up and give us an erudite exanination of the roots of the American presidency... so much so, that you'll feel history come alive and jump right in your lap.

I particularly found the writing on the Washington and Jefferson presidencies to be of great value as the author shows us how these men distinguished the office and made important contributions to our constitutional history. The reader finds out about the awesome responsibilities combined with unique opportunities to persuade others to do their bidding.

In truth, presidentual power is complex and ambiguous, traits that stem from the constitutional provisions for the office... the executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States according to Article 2 of the Constitution... unequivocally. This book is well documented and is written in a masterful narritive, but is easily understood. I found that the early work to be indispensable as the ground work is set and the office is determined. Though the restraints and limits are necessary, they are not, in the nature of things, susceptible to delineation and definition.

As the book progresses on in the life of the presidency we see the individual personallities of the men who served in to office begin to shape the outcome of the office. Making scupulous adherence to written law, self-preservation, and the safety of the nation all interplay in the balance of power between the different branches of the constitutional government.

If you really want to know more about the presidency, look no further as this books gives the reader an illuminating insight with theoretical background of the presidency. this is a very informative and fascinating book.

Professor McDonald marginally develops the intellectual foundation for the presidency and produces soundly researched insights into the presidencies of Washington and Jefferson, but the book cascades into a morass of arbitrary research and shallow analysis in the second half.

His treatment of early philosophical underpinnings for a presidential-type leader is overly long is not well-connected with the actual thoughts and writings of the founders, but his attempt is admirable. The book reaches its height in the examination of the presidencies of Washington and Jefferson, particularly with regard to Jefferson. McDonald describes Jefferson as an astute molder of presidential authority, especially in relation to a quasi-legislative role with Congress and with regard to international relations.

In the last half of the book, however, McDonald turns rather cavalier in his research and arbitrary in his conclusions. Mostly secondary research is selectively presented and arguments are developed with little depth. Most alarmingly for a seasoned and well-regarded historian, his partisanship is scarcely veiled. He defends Nixon as a sympathetic foreign affairs wizard who tried to reign in an irresponsible Congress, but fell prey to a shallow and vindictive press. While a full treatment of Nixon is hardly within the boundaries of this book, Nixon's self-induced problems and serious attempts at Constitutional disruption are embarrassingly not discussed. Additionally, his unabashed admiration for Reagan, while blaming Congress for huge budget deficits and while indicting both a partisan Congress and the press for exaggerating the Iran-Contra affair, displays a lack of judicious and rigorous analysis.

Not a waste of time, but not satisfactory either.

The American Presidency is like no other institution in the world and as evolved precariously from its heyday in 1787. Forrest McDonald focuses on the first few years of the Presidency. he then correlates modern developments and the expansion of the executive state coupled with the rise of the so called fourth branch of government, the bureaucracy. McDonald is somewhat of a conservative, but often withholds judgment on , though refrains from the enthusiastic lust for power and centralization that liberal historians like Arthur Schlesinger seem to have. (I give this book a 3.5/5.0 rating.) I recommend purchasing this book in tandem with _Reassessing the Presidency : The Rise of the Executive State and the Decline of Freedom_ from the Ludwig von Mises Institute.

Mr. McDonald, in his excellent book, traces the theory and practice of the presidency from Washington to Clinton. The theme is a comparison of constitutional writings and the framers' intent, an area in which McDonald is expert, compared with the actual events on the ground. The oval-office push for ever increasing amounts of power, dubbed the "Imperial Presidency" during the Nixon administration, is behavior that did not originate with 20th century presidents. McDonald argues that congress bears much if not most of the responsibility in that it has, decade by decade, abdicated its constitutional responsibilities in many areas, creating a partial vacuum into which the presidency has stepped. McDonald points out the large number of undeclared wars presidents, stretching back to Jefferson, have begun with no objection from congress. Lest we have forgotten, the ability to declare war was vested in congress to prevent presidents from "expeditioning" abroad.

The book is heavily footnoted, but that is not a distraction. The bulk of the focus is on the first decades of this country's existence and the historic background to the creation of the office of "President." Much effort has gone into detailing the philosophy considered by the framers. Our constitution was, after all, written during the "Age of Reason." This background is, at least in part, the reason the book is subtitled "An Intellectual History."

The difficulties in defining the role of the president are part of why most democracies opt for a parliamentary style government. Another huge issue, as Lincoln demonstrated by completely ignoring the constitution he claimed to be upholding in the Civil War, is that if the troops remain loyal to the president, the American system of checks and balances can be destroyed much more easily (at least in theory) than in parliament in which the prime minister's coalition could remove him from power.

This book is another of Professor McDonald's carefully researched and well-written series on the foundations of our nation and our government. It is truly a "must read."

I agree with another reviewer that a few of the bear's destinations were poorly chosen in this book. Two of them, the movie theater and gym, are not relevant in my toddler's life. A grocery store, school, restaurant, library, etc. perhaps would have been more appropriate. However, one key aspect of the book trumps the weaker ones, making this book a must-have: the map at the end. This unusual picture book feature really excites my almost 2-year-old. We trace over the streets, visiting each stop in town with his finger over and over. What a fantastic way to introduce directional and spatial concepts to a toddler! Although imperfect, this book really is a valuable addition to our collection.

I bought this book for my son and he absolutely loves it. We both enjoy reading it again and again and go through the town with the Bear. The color is bright and refreshing. Not only the book introduces different activities the bear does around the town, but also introduces the days of the week. I would recommend this book to anybody with young children.

This is a wonderful little book - loved by both my grandchildren.
The problem is I also ordered another book at the same time called Sharing is Fun (order# 058 4815141 2793915) on May 7th which I still have not recieved! dolores poacelli

I found this book in a used book store and fell in love with it and so did my son and husband. I plan on ordering the others in the series. There are many things to talk about on each page. For example, when Bear goes to the bakery you can talk about all of the different things you can buy at the bakery, cake, cupcakes, bread including regular loaves of bread or long skinny baguettes, cookies, donuts etc. The language stimulation possibilities are endless the with fabulous pictures throughout the books. As a speech pathologist I look for books with pictures that have a lot to talk about and this book fits the bill.

Overall, the Bear series of books are fun, educational and highly enjoyable for my two-year-old son. The quality varies greatly within the series, however, and this one ranks the last on my list. It describes an arbitrary assortment of places and shops, which do not coincide very well with the experience of a typical young child. For example, I have not taken my son to a movie theater and do not plan to do so in the near future. If you are new to the Bear series, you should start with "Bear on a Bike", which, being sophisticated and accessible at the same time, is by far the best.

I had high hopes for this novel after reading the other Amazon reviews. To my displeasure, I found the novel wanting. It was lacking in suspense; both in plot and in character development. The main character 'aged' 20+ years throughout the course of the novel, but his outlook remained stagnant. Some readers/reviewers might consider his laconic and meandering personality to be refreshing, charmingly hard-boiled or amusing. I found it to be boring. I will give the novelist credit for his skillful depiction of an archetypal Kansas 'boom' town. But, disappointingly, there is little else to recommend.

Just as Charles Willeford did before him, Scott Phillips writes darkly comedic novels punctuated with shocking acts of violence. In Cottonwood, Phillips continues this tradition but does so in the context of a well researched story that unfolds in a day and age well beyond the memory of anyone now alive.

Cottonwood, a small fictitious Kansas farming community, sees itself boom when the prospect of a future as an important hub in the cattle trade materializes a few years after the end of the Civil War. Narration is provided by the book's main character Bill Ogden.

Ogden is a man of many talents. A very incomplete list of his skills would include farming, saloonkeeping and photography. He also is quite adept when it comes to sexually pleasuring a diverse demographic of women, one which ironically does not include his own wife. Ogden is a bit of a paradox. Sometimes his actions seem heroic but more often than not the word scoundrel fits him better than anything else.

What is the book about? A number of things. Greed, jealousy, infidelity, lust, murder, the pioneer spirit, the human capacity to do whatever it takes to survive. Throw in a tornado and a German speaking family of serial killers and you have a novel guaranteed to entertain the most jaded among us.

As he did in his second novel, The Walkaway, Phillips shows an amazing ability to transcend time frames. The second half of the book takes place a full 17 years after the first and only a few details about what transpired in the interim are spelled out. Surprisingly, this unconventional structure does not detract from Cottonwood's appeal one bit.

This novel is written with a healthy dose of dark humor and it unfolds in a way that gives the reader credit for having a modicum of intelligence. An enthusiastic 5 stars.

Great characters, a dry and cutting sense of humor and grisly murder -- all served up against the swirling chaos of a Kansas boomtown. The plot surprises as do the many colorful and darkly comic characters, making this tale feel both authentically period and modern in tone. Scott Phillips writes like no other noir author I know; I've read all his stuff and very much look forward to his next piece of fiction.

I continue to be impressed by Scott Phillps' versatility. This western/horror/crime novel is simply fantastic. The "vibe" stayed with me a long time after I finished reading it. I really like the characters, setting, everything. The author does not pander by using "best-seller" techniques. He remains true to his vision. I've been a fan since ICE HARVEST and I plan to buy every single thing this guy ever writes.

I am not much of a reader of novels, nor was I particularly familiar with Scott Phillips. I only picked this novel up because I am originally from Labette County and I was interested to see how he would incorporate the actual historical events of the region into his story.

Having finished a book that was very very hard to put down, I find myself anxiously awaiting Phillips' next effort while simultaneously seeking out his previous two novels, which as I understand were set in 20th-century Wichita.

Phillips has a gifted eye for the absurd (which occasionally veers into the realm of the obscene, so be warned) accompanied by a talent for good dialogue. There were several times where I literally had to struggle not laugh out loud (the baby had just fallen asleep, after all), and I often found myself repeatedly reading passages to my wife so that she too could appreciate one ludicrous scene after another. It was great fun.

The novel can get dark at times, and is often downright gruesome, but for the most part it is ribald Western satire featuring a very interesting protagonist & narrator, Bill Ogden, who is wonderfully amoral --- for the most part, until the chips are down --- and irreverent. Circumstances of his own doing (and some beyond his control) come to pass which force Ogden to flee Cottonwood for almost 20 years as a much-maligned individual, until other events come to pass that induce him to return to the scene of the crime (so to speak) and confront his past actions, as well as dispense justice.

Most of Phillips' strengths lay in his skill with dialogue & character development. He does not spend much time describing the countryside as other authors might do. Some readers may consider this a liability & others may see it as an asset --- all I can say is that I would not have recognized Labette County from any other region in Kansas based on Phillips' descriptive powers. However, his characters are so entertaining as to make you not care particularly. What matters is the story in any case, and this is a good one indeed.

I have read and participated in the AWC staff rides of the battlefields and from that light these book can be instructive at they relate to events and field conditions. They are not for the casual reader or tourist. It is essential that the reader be versed in both the theory and tactics of the time before visiting the site and that you are to read these books while standing on the actual grounds.

These books supplement case studies at the AWC in tactical and strategic thinking. Observe the battleground as a military officer would and try to put yourself in the mind of the writer. What you will be reading are the after action reports written by the officers assigned to write them, of their viewings of events on the field. Beware sometimes these reports can be self serving so take that in mind.

Reading the reports and standing on location will help to give you an incite into field situations and problems that the military officer must see, recognize and solve. One key point to remember is that of communication is not what it is today. The field of battle only existed as far as the individual officer could see. He generally knew nothing of events occuring several hundred yards away let alone a mile or so away in real time. All he knew what what was right in front of him. He never sees the big picture that today's communications can provide or seek instant clarification of orders.

With this in mind and a knowledge of the methods of Civil War fighting these books are very instructive.

If you are interested in the Maryland campaign of 1862, this is the book for you! It includes South Mountain, Crampton's Gap, Harpers Ferry and a good bit of detail on Shepherdstown.

Unlike the Gettysburg guide this book outlines the campaign on an "operational" as well as "tactical" level. Both of which are easy to understand and follow along if you desire to use this book as a battlefield guide.

The driving directions along with detailed maps, historical photos, and reports taken from the Official Records make this book a complete tour and reference package!

If you require an outstanding volume of work detailing nearly every aspect of the campaign, then look no further. I highly recommend this book as "must read" for anyone interested in Marse Robert's Maryland Campaign of 1862. It will also make an excellent reference tool for anyone who cannot make it to the battlefield. It brings the fields of battle to you!

The Antietam battlefield guide is the second of many Civil War guidebooks and continued setting the standard started in the Gettysburg guide. The book covers the bloodiest single day battle of the American Civil War and a Battlefield Park that has suffered very little from commercialization. In addition to Antietam, South Mountain and Harpers Ferry are included. This gives you a detailed understanding of the important battles leading up to Antietam. Antietam is a confusing battle; this is not a battle history as such. My recommendation is to read Priest's book "Antietam" before visiting this field. This is one of a number of guidebooks on the battle and is an option to employing a guide or purchasing a park driving tour.
The series format is directions to a point on the field, orientation, a general lesson on what happened in your view, followed by first person accounts of the action. These guides are designed using the general staff training concept of a Staff Ride. This is when a class is taken to a historic location, discuss what happened and see how the terrain influences the event. Staff Rides are designed to be intensive "on the ground" training coupled with physical observation in the hopes students will gain experience for later use.
I am not saying this to frighten you away from this guide but to tell you this is not a walk about and look at the monuments type of guide. This guide will have several pages devoted to the action at this point. It may contain a critique of the local commander's actions with possible alternates.
My experience is that reading the book prior to my visit works best. This allows me more time observing the field and less time reading the book. Of the tour options, a professional guide is usually the best but most expensive choice. The park driving tour is the best choice for a quick trip through the field to get the kids passport stamp. This book is the best choice for a serious student of the battle looking for a detailed explanation.

Luvas' book provided an excellent itinerary for those who would visit the Antietam battlefield. However, it fails to help the reader understand the context of the given part of the battle to the whole. After positioning you at strategic points he simply reprints copies of the official reports from officers involved in the components of the battle. Since many officers' reports were comprehensive reports of the entire battle, and Luvas takes only a small section of the report for a given area of the battlefield, even the reports lose the perspective of context.

Another thing missing is a comprehensive map of the battlefield with his selected stops, again helping show the context of a given part of the battle with the whole.

Antietam featured one of the bloodiest battles of the Civil War. This is another fine work in the Army War College Guides to Civil War Battles series. I think I'm getting hooked. . . .

The norm with this series is to begin with a bit of context about the battle. Then, reports of key officers--both Blue and Gray--are presented, to provide a sense of events from the eyes of the participants themselves. Finally, a chapter that explores larger issues, in this case the logistics of battle. To complete the volume, there is the always helpful "Order of Battle" (in which the units and their commanding officers for each army are listed) and the grisly listing of casualties for both sides.

The book covers the entire campaign, by the way, not just Antietam itself. That means that we get first hand reports from South Mountain, Crampton's Gap, Harper's Ferry, Bolivar Heights, and, finally, Antietam. One problem with using official reports, of course, is that those who took part may well not take accountability for any errors that they made in command. Nonetheless, their own views as to what happened is useful in itself.

Since I was born in the Midwest, I always pay attention to troops from that region in battle. In this campaign, once again, the "Iron Brigade" catches my attention. Indeed, its performance at South Mountain, in helping the Union forces to clear the pass, led to General McClellan making a comment that produced the label "Iron Brigade." Pages 42-44 provide Gen. John Gibbons' comments (he commanded the brigade) and those of Col. Solomon Meredith, commander of the 19th Indiana regiment in the Brigade.

And on it goes, with the bloodletting at Antietam, as the two armies bled one another down. Most sanguinary. Both sides saw near successes and then near misses, as each side pounded away at the other. At the end of the day, as Burnside, unlikeliest of possible heroes, was hit hard by A. P. Hill's late arriving Confederate "Light Division." With that, both sides withdrew to lick their wounds. Shortly thereafter. Robert E. Lee began the withdrawal of the Confederate forces.

The final substantive chapter deal effectively with issues of logistics.

All in all, a fine work on a desperate struggle. If you find that battlefield reports are helpful, you will probably enjoy this work.