Truman Books

This 1953 book contains his articles and comments on the news from 1945 to 1952. Stone thanks the NY newspapers for the freedom that allowed him to write. Stone was an independent journalist who criticized the fallacies of politicians and others. After nearly 60 years you can judge his comments on the events of that era. When Stone was 14 he began his own small monthly newspaper. He worked on newspapers when in high school and college (p.xii). He never took journalism courses because of his practical experiences. The 'Forward' tells about his life and philosophy. "Power breeds injustice", it is better to defend the underdog (p.xiii). Were the platitudes of the "McGuffey Reader" banned because of the thought control of the Cold War (p.xviii)? Should freedom of speech be protected? Stone compares the reactionary policies of Truman to the revolutionary policies in the early 19th century (p.xxii). Is intellectual freedom the constant struggle of mankind (p.xxiii)?

Stone said WW II was "a war against fascism" that will let loose the forces of freedom (p.4). He blames war on "ancient nationalist egotisms" and totally ignores war as caused by business rivalry (trade or colonies). These articles remind you of what has changed since then, and what remains the same. The 25 chapters contain 76 articles. There is no index.

Chapter 9 has essays on political economics. The "dollar shortage" of Western Europe reflects their loss of income from foreign investments and exports from colonial possessions. This loss ends the primacy of Western Europe in world affairs. Stone says American tariffs must be lower to allow Western Europe to prosper, but says America will eventually prosper. But American capital fears the competition from a recovered Western Europe (p.73). Cheap raw materials require an oppressed colonial country. Foreign aid guarantees private investments abroad. But this leads to military assistance for a force that can exploit a nation for its wealth (p.76). This policy of repression is very old and very corrupt.

Chapter 11 has the most articles; they discuss the attempts of political repression, "American fascism" (p.86). Those who didn't think "right" would be banned from gainful employment. Unions would be destroyed. Stone points out how other proposals were enacted into law! A WW II army veteran who lost both legs also lost his job as a clerk in the Veterans Administration because his political party was on the Attorney Generals list. [A well-known consumer organization was also on this list for years!] Powerful forces acted to create right-wing commentators on radio (p.89). [This is not a recent development.] Stone gives a censored description of blacklisting that used opinions (p.91). He tells about the questioning of Ambassador Jessup (p.101). The article on the ACLU could not then mention that Morris L. Ernst had a secret relationship with J. Edgar Hoover (p.103). Stone questions the politics of the CIO's purge of the UE as weakening the union (p.108).
Stone supports free speech as a libertarian socialist (p.110).

Having had this book in my bookcase for about 16 years, I finally decided to read it. Having done so, the best that I can say about Truman's Spy is that is an okay read, in that it is good enough to finish but not good enough to recommend highly. The plot, which involves an FBI agent's attempt in 1950 to investigate a Main Line Philadelphia banking family, and which subsequently involves a KGB assassination team -- not to mention the conflict between J. Edgar Hoover and President Truman, is just satisfying enough to make you want to find out what happens next. However, it is not one that will keep you "on the edge of your seat," nor is it one that you will find difficult to put down. The character development is, at best, okay, with most characters being somewhat one-dimensional and a few are caricaturish. And lastly, while Hynd maintains a moderate level of suspense througout the book, there are, ultimately very few surprises.

Zebby is sick and tired of getting her stories censored when she writes for the school paper at Truman Middle School, so she decides to quit. After talking about it to her best friend Amr, they decide to start an underground newspaper--only theirs will be online!

Their online newspaper, called The Truth About Truman School, is supposed to be a place where students can post stories or feelings about school issues--as long as what they put on there is true. Zebby tells herself and Amr that they are not to censor anyone like she was censored. This belief backfires when someone starts posting mean pictures and comments about one of Zebby's former friends Lilly, turning their newspaper into a place to bully her. Naturally, the students at Truman don't say anything to an adult about it, so the hurtful comments continue. How much pain is Lilly supposed to endure at the hands of this site before she finally breaks?

This book was a pretty quick read told from point of view of many characters, but the reader is left guessing as to who the poster bullying Lilly really is (we're told by the end). It made me sad to think that someone so young would really post such mean things online about someone else so young, but I suppose that is a reality these days. At least everything is wrapped up satisfactorily in the end. Definitely a middle school book for girls, this story will be enjoyed by those who like gossip.

"The Buck Stops Here" is a compact collection of sayings of Harry Truman. It is organized topically. I read it in search of quotes for a class on Harry Truman for which I was preparing. For this purpose I would rate it as successful. I ended up noting 16 entries. This book does provide the reader with an insight into Truman's thoughts and words. This book provides few memorable quotations to elevate your speech. I do not fault the book. Truman was common, not very quotable. It is often said that Republicans like to quote Democrats. After reading this book one will understand why Truman is rarely quoted. He was truly a common man in word and action. This is not one of the better quotation books which I have found.

This is one in a long series of Capitol murder mysteries penned by Washington insider and presidential daughter Margaret Truman. Murder at the National Gallery is the first of Ms. Truman's works that I have read and I found it interesting, true to DC ( I am a Washingtonian also), clever, but a bit difficult to follow and rambling.

A long-time Gallery curator Luther Mason finally gets his day in the sun, when he organizes a Caraveggio exhibition and "discovers" a lost work. Actually he buys it from an Italian underworld figure with the help of corrupt Italian government employee and a defrocked priest. Mason's plan is to sell the work to another gangster and stick the Italians with a clever forgery, done by a drunk Parisian. This premise is a bit thin; I think modern art historian tools would uncover this ruse quickly.

Anyway the story develops nicely. Mason is a hero for putting together the show, but then the root of all evil surfaces. Everyone involved (and there are way too many for this episode to work) wants more money. Of course, they are all murdered to save money and tie up loose ends. Like Austin Powers, our hero has agreed to sell the painting probably worth $40 MM for $1 MM and needs to split that many ways.

Mason also goes to his just rewards and we proceed to the very clever finale. Mason's friend Pims, host of a cable TV show, stage manages all the characters to a scenic spot in Italy. Here in a comic and tragic scene, it unfolds that no one really knows who has original or forgery and who are the buyers and sellers.

I am going to read another of Ms. Truman's works in this series, but this one is not at the level of our great mystery writers.

In Murder at the National Gallery, Margaret Truman examines the character flaws that can make a relatively mild-mannered, relatively good man, Luther Mason, turn to crime. We get to meet his cold mother, his ambitious ex-wife, his controlling girlfriend, his spoiled son, and also the delightful Annabel Reed-Smith, commissioned by the Vice-President's wife to work with Luther on the National Gallery's prestigious exhibit of the tempestuous Italian painter Carivaggio's work.

It's Annabel that helps to solve the mystery. We get to experience her joys and trials as an art gallery owner. We travel with her to Italy and learn about the amazing collections of magnificent art that exist in that country. We also hold our breath when Annabel gets mixed up in Luther Mason's crazy schemes and comes close to losing her life.

In my opinion, Murder at the National Gallery started slow. However, I felt happy that I stayed with the story because it heated up nicely as it progressed until I felt very grateful for the wide range of characters, an insider's look into the world of fine art forgeries, behind the scenes at the Capital, the Italian mob's connection with fine art, and a suspenseful mystery.

Synopsis:

Part of the series that features a murder in many prominent Washington, D.C. buildings, Murder at the National Gallery is all about the intrigues surrounding the opening of an art show featuring Renaissance artist Caravaggio and a "lost" piece of art that was found just in time for the show. Will the murderer be satisfied with just the murder of a member of the Italian diplomatic corps who had a reputation for stealing Italian masterpieces and selling them to foreign buyers? Are the rumors of forged paintings true? Did someone steal a priceless piece of art?

My Review:

Mrs. Truman knows her stuff when it comes to the Washington, D.C. social scene because yes, she is the daughter of Harry Truman.

This is really a decent book. I've read others in this series and found them of varying quality. However, I found the topic interesting and I was introduced to the concept of 'Art Police.' Washington, D.C. has its very own squad to investigate art fraud and robbery.

There are characters that were introduced in other books.

The end of the book was a little...strange. But, overall I give this book '4 stars.'

The lost Carvaggio is discovered and a certain National Gallery curator has big ideas for its future. Why not copy it a couple of times, sell the fakes and take it with him to some far off place where he may enjoy the three r's for the rest of his life? He could let go of his useless family, nagging ex-wives and the daily D.C. grind. Can he get away with it? Will someone or something interrupt the perfect plan for the big switch-a-roo?

Truman writes a predictable story that is mildly enjoyable. However, the characters she uses have absolutely no personality distinctions. It is extremely difficult for dear reader to draw a mental image of each character because she makes almost no attempt to give them any physically identifiable distinctions! This novel is somewhat discouraging for want of this reviewer to peruse another Truman story.

Having read and enjoyed other Truman books in the Capital Crimes series years ago, I was extremely disappointed in this rather sophomoric story. The plot is completely predictable, way too long and dragged down with unnecessary details which do nothing to advance plot, characterization or setting. The characters are either thoroughly unlikable or cliched stereotypes. (Sometimes both.) The toast on the last page which lauds the Mason, senior curator, as "a good and decent man who made one mistake" is exceptionally nauseating. Finally, the relationship between Annabel and her husband, Mac, is so corny, it makes the marriages depicted on "The Donna Reed Show" or "Father Knows Best" look noir. I bought this book because I was going to be spending a few days in Washington, DC and wanted to read something "on site." Any other Washington book would have been preferable.

I don't know that I have ever read a book quite like this. It is not a literary masterpiece, but rather, a graphic, stark, honest reflection of the author's history and how he perceived it. To read this book is to feel anger, betrayal, compassion, loss, and a truly genuine gamit of emotions. The author speaks with the language of a "drunken sailor" because he was, and this is his honest and very personal message. His story explains the anger of many and the frustration of thousands. No wonder, people came back from Vietnam changed. He makes you question: Is mankind really that much different than combative animals during a ritual mating spar? His answer may surprise you. Yes -- the animals do not battle to the death -- we do!!! Man is not as civilized as we pretend. When we put on the pretense, it leads to anger, frustration and illness. The author makes that all too clear. A must read for anybody wanting to know more about the human animal. A must read for anybody who likes adventure. A must read for anybody who gives a damn about his fellow man. You will not finish the book without asking yourself some very uneasy questions about your own private thoughts. A must read!!!

I assume that the name Jack Eager is a pseudonym because this entire book is a work of fiction. As a combat infantry veteran of the 196th Light Infantry Brigade, and its association's current Vice President, I can assure you that this is virtually all delusionary ramblings. If Mr. Eager is attempting to use this venue to substantiate a claim for PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder), he picked the wrong unit to defame. The 196th Light Infantry Brigade served proudly in Vietnam from 1966 through 1972 and was, in fact, the last ground combat unit to leave the field in Vietnam. The 196th suffered 1200 brave men killed and thousands more wounded during that conflict with never a spot of shame or scandal. The 196th was honorably deactivated after Vietnam but due to its exceptionally distinguished war record it was chosen to be reactivated in May 1998 as a training brigade with responsibility for the entire Pacific area. It WAS an Americal Division unit that was involved in the infamous "My Lai Incident" but it WAS NOT an element of the 196th. Our honor, and integrity as a combat unit is without peer. To say that this book is factual is a disservice to all of the brave men, living and dead, who served in the 196th. I believe that in the name of responsible journalistic oversight this book should either be removed from public offering or at least reclassified and marketed as a work of fiction until its veracity can be determined.

This is an out right lie and the "author" and publisher should be sued for defaming the men who served in the unit. These men should contribute to a class action suit. I defy anyone to provide a bit of proof. I am a retired SFC, USA Special Forces, three tours in VN, two with SOG in Recon, medically retired due to wounds (loss of left leg at hip & multiple fragments) in 1968. This type of crap should not be allowed to remain in the public domain. If anyone out in the world has a sense of honor a fund will be started to get the truth out. This is why those veterans who do suffer from PTSD get a bad rap, but it is part of the PTSD "business" that make their living off the backs of good men who need help. For those vets with PTSD do not let this discourage or defame you.

Page after page contains discrepancies and falsehoods. Eager doesn't seem to know the difference between C rations and K rations, for example. But he does say he arrived in Vietnam on Feb. 9, 1968, and he names a number of men killed in his unit. Unfortunately for him, members of the 196th Light Infantry Brigade Association have a complete list of 196th LIB members who were killed in Vietnam. Eager's KIA names do not match those on the list.

I read 96 pages before Eager's fascination with torture, murder and mutilation sickened me and made me put the book down. If you want a provocative book about Vietnam, read "Stolen Valor" by B.G. Burkett, Glenna Whitley. Heavily documented, the book tells how and why hundreds of frauds have posed as Vietnam veterans to gain attention, money, special treatment in prison, and VA disability payments.

While most of us Vietnam veterans who experienced combat during this era did not witness or participate in the type of atrocities represented in this book as facts. I must retract my use of the term fruad or lies in reference to this book. While Mr. Egger doesnt represent facts to back up his story. I can only refer to my opinion and experiences to doubt it's authenticity . If this book helped this man recover from his combat experiences so be it....

Messrs. Rovere and Schlesinger want to see the Truman-MacArthur feud as that of a heroic liberal President who prevents a reactionary American general from dominating foreign policy. I don't know whether the authors are blind to what really went on or whether they just fell for a Manichean view of the world, but this book is extremely misleading. It is also an object lesson how today's wisdom can lead to tomorrow's blunders.

MacArthur was fired for a simple reason. Truman imposed a gag order on him, preventing him from making public remarks until he gave the President the opportunity to censor them. MacArthur obeyed this request, but when he received a letter from a Congressman, he responded honestly, forthrightly and without allowing the President to censor his remarks. Since he took an oath to defend the Constitution, he thought, he answered to all three branches of the government, not solely to the President. The Congressman published the letter and MacArthur got canned.

How can the authors protray this as an assertion of civilian control over the military? You have to be pretty biased not to see it for what it is: the assertion of the executive over the legislative branch. This established the ground rules for future military brass: you are subject to no one but the President. H.R. MacMaster's Dereliction of Duty shows what happened next. When Presidents Kennedy and Johnson lied to Congress about Vietnam, the generals clammed up and let Robert MacNamara misrepresent their own views. The Imperial Presidency had grown bigger.

The problem with books like this is that they make you stupider for having read them. The facts are all there, but the spin blinds you to reality.

This book is concise, yet extremely informative. Richard H. Rovere and Arthur Schlesinger Jr. prove to be a great match in writing the "General and the President." The book opens on a brief note on General Douglas Macarthur's early military history, followed by the outbreak of the Korean war, and the origins and climax of the feud between General Macarthur and President Harry Truman. It comes complete with maps of Korea, political cartoons from the era, and a well documented appendix consisting of speeches, conversations, and testimonies from key government officials of the time. This book is a must read for anyone interested in the Korean War and the famous feud.

This book clearly does a desrvce to the truth. You can't expect someone like Arthur Schlesinger to come anywhere near the truth. Here is the truth that Arthur Schlesinger doesn't want you to know.

The fact is that the Communist Chinese threatened to intervene if the U.N. troops pushed passed the 38th parallel, not up to the Yalu river. It was Truman's orders to push to the Yalu river or until the North Koreans surrendered, whichever came first.

It was Truman's error not to allow Gen. MacArthur to bomb the Yalu bridges thereby insuring that the Chinese could not cross over into the Korean peninsula in any substantial numbers. Intelligence documents released a few years ago identified why the Chinese were so confident about their involvement in the war. The Soviet Union used spies in the U.S. government to determine whether Truman would allow MacArthur to press a campaign against China if they were to enter the war. These are the same traitors that Senator Joseph McCarthy railed against later in his committee investigations. The Venona documents verified the validity of these espionage activities and this was all happening right under the nose of President Truman.

The information that the Soviets culled from their American traitors and spies was subsequently passed on to the Communist Chinese. General Lin Piao, the commander of the Chinese troops who poured across the Yalu bridges into Korea, was able to boast in a leaflet distributed in China, "l would never have made the attack and risked my men and military reputation if I had not been assured that Washington would restrain General MacArthur from taking adequate retaliatory measures against my lines of supply and communication."

The Chinese then attacked the U.N. troops, comfortable in the knowledge that Truman would do nothing more than fight a defensive war.

After the war had ended, the U.S. Congress investigated. General Mark Clark told the committee empanelled to review what had happened: "I was not allowed to bomb the numerous bridges across the Yalu River over which the enemy constantly poured his trucks and his munitions, and his killers." General James Van Fleet said: "My own conviction is that there must have been information to the enemy from high diplomatic authorities that we would not attack his home bases across the Yalu." Air Force General George Stratemeyer added: "You get in war to win it. You do not get in war to stand still and lose it, and we were required to lose it. We were not permitted to win." And General MacArthur then summarized: "Such a limitation upon the utilization of available military force to repel an enemy attack has no precedent, either in our own history, or so far as I know, in the history of the world."

At this point in the war, however, hordes of Chinese communist troops stormed across the Yalu River from Manchuria, and the war began again in earnest. MacArthur was denied permission to destroy the bridges over the river across which poured men and supplies destined for use against his men. He protested to no avail and was soon relieved of command by President Harry Truman, whom the Chicago Tribune stated at the time wasn't worthy to shine the general's shoes.
Command of the U.S./ROK forces was turned over to General Matthew Ridgway. He immediately altered the method of fighting. In his own book, The Korean War, Ridgway stated that his first task on assuming MacArthur's command was "to place reasonable restrictions on the Eighth [U.S. Army] and ROK Armies' advance." Then he drafted detailed orders to field commanders containing such passages as, "You will direct the efforts of your forces toward inflicting maximum personnel casualties and material losses on hostile forces in Korea .... Acquisition of terrain of itself is of little or no value."

Classic military strategy includes the taking and holding of terrain until so much of it has been acquired that the adversary is forced to sue for peace. But this was no longer allowable strategy in Korea. Even worse, our men were told that killing was to be their main goal. A morally sound military principle holds that removing an enemy's capability to impose his will should be the goal -- and killing him is not always necessary. Which is precisely what MacArthur had demonstrated with the successful landing at Inchon.

Eventually the war in Korea degenerated to two years of fighting over relatively inconsequential hills near the 38th parallel. Bitter hard-fought battles would be waged by our troops to take a particular objective. Then, after success had been achieved with plenty of casualties on both sides, orders from on high would require them to abandon the terrain they had just won.

From the victory that had been gained after Inchon, our forces were required eventually to settle for a stalemate.

If Truman had let MacArthur bomb the Yalu bridges that would have stopped the Chinese from coming into Korea, we wouldn't be facing this mess. And, China could have been freed from communism if we had let the 500,000 men Taiwan had offered us to fight the North Koreans and the Chinese. This all goes back to the communists that were in the Truman administration that influenced Truman into stripping the Chinese Nationalists of their weapons and forcing them out of the Chinese mainland in the first place.

So, yes, Truman is responsible for losing China to communism. Arthur Schlesinger doesn't any won't tell you this. Don't bother with this tripe.

I read this book for a history class, it was ok.

Dull, trite and absolutely riddled with errors. Don't let students read this. Get McCullough's and make them plow through it.

This was required reading for a graduate course in American history. In this engaging biography, Robert H. Ferrell, who has authored and edited eight previous books on Truman, does an admirable job of presenting the life and presidency of Harry S. Truman. Although one can detect Ferrell's admiration for Truman, one senses from the extensive notes, bibliography, and research conducted at the Truman Library as well as his willingness to criticize Truman for his mistakes, that Ferrell has written a very balanced biography of Truman. Ferrell's book is a good introductory biography of Truman's whole life; the first eight chapters are devoted to his life prior to his ascendancy to the presidency in 1945 after the death of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. One gets the sense that Truman was the last president of an earlier and simpler time in America. He was the last president who was not a college graduate nor was he well--off financially. Ferrell's biography captures the essence of what type of a man Truman was and what history and his fellow citizens perceived him as.
"A plain-speaking, straight-talking, ordinary fellow (people thought) who did what he saw as his duty without turning his obligation into opportunity for personal gain" (179). Ferrell also exposed Truman's flaws such as being overprotective and too loyal to friends that had done wrong. Often he took it as a personal affront when anyone differed with him.
Ferrell presents a few experiences from Truman's early years that formed his character. From farming, Truman gained a work ethic that served him well throughout his life. His experience as an artillery captain and battery commander during WWI was instrumental in proving to himself and others that he was a very capable and caring leader of men. This experience was instrumental in putting him on the path of a political life. His experience as a failed haberdasher and bank speculator in the 1920's caused Truman to be a fiscal conservative the rest of his life and a good steward of the government's money. In addition, he learned about and came to understand and respect ethnic minorities, such as Catholics and Jews, from his Army and haberdashery experiences. Thus, Ferrell astutely proved that understanding Truman's early life experiences are instrumental if one wants to properly analyze Truman's decision-making process in the domestic and foreign policy arena.
"The Buck Stops Here" placard on Truman's desk has become legendary in presidential history. One of his secretaries of state, Dean Acheson, admired Truman for capably understanding the complexities of a situation and his willingness to make a hard decision without vacillating. Truman was adept at gathering all of the facts in a timely manner, listening to people's opinions and turning the options over in his mind, and then when he arrived at what he thought was the correct decision, he made it and stuck to his guns. Truman wound up making many important decisions that have affected America to this day such as, using nuclear weapons against Japan to end WWII, integrating the military in 1948, recognizing the state of Israel, creating the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and involving American military forces in the Korean war.
One of the first, most momentous, and most often debated decisions that Truman had to make as President was whether to use two atomic bombs against Japan to hasten the end of WWII. Ferrell and other historians have made a very convincing argument to support Truman's decision-making process to use nuclear weapons to end the war. The Japanese military, who effectively controlled their government, were fanatics in their prosecution of the war. The Japanese people had suffered through numerous fire bombings of their cities in the months leading up to the end of the war, in which hundreds of thousands of their citizens were killed. In addition, the military had lost many battles and virtually all of its island holdings in the Pacific, and yet the government was strengthening its homeland forces and preparing for invasion instead of seriously considering surrender. Ferrell, relying on information gathered by Edward J. Drea, who wrote about the American military intelligence estimate gathered in July of 1945 mainly through the deciphering of Japanese radio traffic, showed that up to 600,000 Japanese were being prepared to fight in the event of an American invasion. Even this estimate turned out to be too low, since after the war American intelligence learned that the Japanese actually had some 900,000 prepared to fight against the invasion. American military estimates of the cost of life in the event of an invasion of the Japanese home islands were at best sketchy, and many historians who have written against the use of atomic weapons have used the unreliability of the estimates as one of their examples why Truman was wrong to use the nuclear option. However, Thomas B. Allen and Norman Polmar in their book, Codename Downfall, which detailed the plan to invade Japan, wrote that Truman was presented with an estimate that showed that there could be 238,000 American casualties and possibly the same number of Japanese casualties. This information coupled with the very real evidence of how tenaciously the Japanese people had fought was no myth, and convinced Truman that dropping the bombs on Japan to end the war was the right decision. One only had to look at the horrific casualty figures for American battles on Iwo Jima and Okinawa to name a few in order to understand just how fiercely the Japanese were capable of fighting. Ferrell aptly showed that Truman's decision has come under criticism throughout the years partly because of how he had stridently defended it and was so dismissive of the critics of his decision. "The president's critics, one suspects, were ready to accuse him because they did not admire other things he did or approved. They were critical because of his well-known decisiveness, which sometimes seemed offhanded" (214).
Truman, almost by necessity and circumstance, was forced to alter America's foreign policy of isolationism to one of internationalism. Truman realized the Korean War left him in a predicament. If he did not defend South Korea in the wake of North Korea's attack, he then would acquiescence to the Communist North Koreans, and ultimately the Russians. By not defending South Korea, American prestige in Asia and the world would undoubtedly would be tarnished. Yet, if he did attack, he risked a world war with the Chinese and the Russians, and ultimately a nuclear war. In light of the Truman doctrine, and America's stance on communism, Truman decided to defend South Korea. It was a widely unpopular war, which ended in a stalemate. Yet, Ferrell entertains a notion that America did not become the world superpower after WW II, but rather during the Korean War because America intervened to defend a non-communist nation, in essence, America became the police and protection force for weaker non-communist countries in the face of communist aggression. Many historians would agree that the year 1945 and the history after irreversibly changed the world. The cold war, America's role in world affairs, and the question of nuclear weapons all contributed.
Truman initially set about reorganizing the bureaucracy, conducting a complete overhaul of cabinet and staff. In addition to creating the Budget Bureau and the National Security Council, he created the Council of Economic Advisers, which he staffed it with both conservatives and liberals and regarded it as an advisory committee. Ferrell positively describes Truman's intellect, honesty, and integrity throughout the book but one of the places where it shines most brightly is in his civil rights efforts, which is rarely given the credit it deserves in historical accounts. Ferrell examines possible reasons behind Truman's change of heart on civil rights and concludes that much of his perspective came from his principled sense of fairness and his belief that the duty of the office of the President was to represent all Americans. The Truman-appointed Civil Rights Commission presented a frank report, entitled To Secure These Rights, with a ten-point agenda of civil rights reforms. Lacking congressional support, he turned to the power of executive orders to start the desegregation of the armed forces.
His second administration was marred by scandals, including the Hoey Investigation, the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, and the Bureau of Internal Revenue illegal activity, for which the president was criticized for failing to take appropriate action. Another one of Truman's domestic challenges, which cost him politically, was labor strikes. To avoid a steelworker strike, Truman invoked what he believed to be the inherent powers of the president to seize control of the mills and was rebuffed by the Supreme Court. As the 1952 election loomed, Truman bristled that the emerging Democratic candidate, Adlai Stevenson, was distancing himself from Truman's administration. Although they reconciled and Truman even assisted with campaign speeches, it was to little avail. Eisenhower won 55 percent of the popular vote and Truman finished out his lame duck presidency.
In his post-presidency years, Truman returned to Independence and his quiet life. He solicited donations to build a presidential library, which he donated to the federal government, a convention which later presidents have followed. Likewise, he refused endorsements and placement in corporate payrolls because he believed that accepting financial opportunities would diminish the integrity of the office of President. As a result, Harry and Bess Truman lived out the remainder of their lives without the safety of financial savings. He established a precise daily routine at his library, which included writing copious amount of letters and receiving many visitors. Ever the politician, he remained connected with Washington life and accepted invitations to the White House in both the Eisenhower and Kennedy administrations. In his final years, bothered with health problems, he took refuge in music and books. He died the day after Christmas, 1972 and was buried at his presidential library in Independence, with all the pomp and circumstance fitting a former President.

Thus, Ferrell does a very convincing job of making one believe just how important and interesting it is to study Truman, especially since he was so very different from the presidents who had come before and after him.

Recommended reading for anyone interested in American history, foreign policy, Cold War history.

Everyone knows that Harry Truman provided help to the Zionists because he could count votes, and there were few Arab votes in 1948. That, anyway, is the thesis developed by John Snetsinger in 1974 and since repeated ad nauseum. Well, it turns out not to be true. In a masterful and exciting presentation, Benson proves that Trumanýs policies resulted not from nose-counting but from deeply-held beliefs. His pro-Israel outlook ýwas based primarily on humanitarian, moral, and sentimental grounds, many of which were an outgrowth of the presidentýs religious upbringing and his familiarity with the Bible.ý Extensive research into Trumanýs biography and earlier career shows his impressive consistency. Benson, of the University of Utah, establishes Truman as a studious child and deeply religious young man who, when he unexpectedly found himself in the Oval Office, lived faithfully by his precepts. In the case at hand, he expressed sympathy for Zionism as early as 1939 and reiterated his views many times subsequently. Trumanýs determination had great importance; of the many momentous issues in his presidency, he personally involved himself most directly with what he called the ýpuzzle of Palestine.ý In Bensonýs words, these personal interventions against the entirety of the American foreign policy establishment ýconstantly rescuedý the Jews from defeat. The author concludes that the standard account of Truman risking U.S. security interests for cheap political advantage is deeply unfair to this most moral and honorable of American presidents.

Middle East Quarterly, September 1998

While the author heaps truckloads of eulogies about "honor, integrity and deep moral convictions" on a man whom Gen. Douglas MacArthur should have hanged as a traitor, the fact is, it was Truman's flagrant disregard for the U.S. Constitution that gave him the "fortitude" to support the invasion of a foreign nation. The 1st Amendment, as we all know, clearly states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." While everyone is at liberty to endorse and support whatever religious cause or organization they choose, our government is supposed to remain neutral on such matters. As was the case with Harry "atomic bomb" Truman, left wingers always refer to the first amendment when it serves their purpose to subvert our institutions but always flagrantly violate it when it is convenient for them to do so. To refer to Harry Truman, who was directly responsible for the systematic slaughter of American soldiers during the Korean War, the Massacre at Hiroshima, the betrayal of China to his Communist friends, the communising of Europe, as a man motivated by deep moral conviction, humanitarianism, etc, is enough to make anyone puke.

Most of us in America presume that religious convictions are checked at the doors of our governmental offices. Benson's book articulates exactly how Truman's deep religious convictions guided--even determined--the U.S. policy toward Isral, leading to the official recognition of its independence. Without that recognition, the Nation of Israel might not have lasted a week--let alone 50 years.

This book is a slightly modified version of Benson's Oxford University Ph.D. dissertation. There he studied Modern Middle Eastern History.

As an academic work, the research is absolutely unmatched, with dozens of references and footnotes for each chapter. The author interviewed several prominent people who knew Truman and participated in the development of the policy toward Isreal.

More importantly, however, the book is accessible to any well-read student of American History. Anyone who is a fan of Truman will love the book; those not already enthusiastic supporters of the! late President, will likely become such after reading Benson's account.

In a country where well over 90% of the population awows a faith in God, it should be reassuring to know that a leader's faith influences his politics and policy-making.

Ms. Truman has had a long run of Capital Crime Mysteries now and honestly, I can't really find anything "wrong" with this one. It just didn't seem to have the pizazz of others in the series, even though we see the same protagonist. Mystery lovers will enjoy this book even though it seemed like some plot elements were after-thoughts. A bit too predictable, also, as I had figured out the murderer about 1/3 of the way in to it. Better than having nothing to read though, I suppose.

I had to read this book for school. I don't know WHY. All the characters were identical, the plot was confusing, and the end had no real explanation whatsoever. It took me a MONTH to read this garbage. I think she's just riding on the wave of her Daddy's fame from his presidency and never actually bothered to take writing lessons.

In this addition to a stunning mystery series, Mac and Annabel Smith met some real quirky characters. These characters are the breath of fresh air that the series needed to keep from getting stale. The plot in this story keeps the reader interested and there are enough twists and turns to not be bored but not too many to get confused.