Kansas Books

The ever-resourceful and totally delightful eponymous hero and his charges were shot at, had fires set against them, faced stampedes of cattle and avalanches of rocks.

With a delicate and subtle touch, the author describes the beginning of mutual attraction between Calico (the dependable and solid cowboy) and Josh (a young man just emerging into manhood) . We also get to see how two sheltered and privileged soon to be eighteen year olds from

With economic and masterful use of words, Grey sets his scenes, One example being, "They broke camp shortly after dawn, while the air was still crisp enough to show their breath. A flat meadow of fog and mist spread out below them ..."

This book will be enjoyed by readers of romance, westerns and good old-fashioned mystery-thrillers. I have no hesitation in awarding it top marks.

Reviewed by Terry South for Reader Views (2/07)

"Calico" combines a multitude of genre's which includes romance, mystery, western, and adventure. Calico Ramsay is the protagonist and is a cowboy who happens to be gay. Calico has to escort two 17-year-old orphaned twins who are from Chicago, to their aunt after their uncle is killed just before he was to pick up the twins at the rail station. The twins are Sara and Josh, and Calico must protect them till he gets them to his Uncle Dan's sister, Rebecca, who lives in Bow Ridge, Colorado. Calico becomes aware of the dangers they are faced with when the first hotel they stay in goes up in flames. Calico realizes someone does not want them to reach their final destination. As their adventure continues, Calico begins to develop protective feelings for the twins and must safeguard them at all costs. Throughout their adventure the twins learn to adjust to the living out in the country while Calico is learning about himself.

The characters are believable and you develop feelings and a love for those characters. Not only is this a western but also a love story. Calico begins to fall for Josh and the love story begins to grow slowly as Josh returns those feelings.

The story contains action, mystery and adventure and fans of the genre of western and romance will enjoy this read. It contains a gay developing romance that is gentle, but may not be for everyone. You will have to decide for yourself based on your taste in stories.

The author describes this book, "Calico," as a "western/romance/adventure/mystery with a twist" - with the twist being that Calico Ramsay is a gay cowboy. Personally not the type of reading material I enjoy, but was a good read.

CALICO is a delightful, unique read, for seldom do we find a romantic mystery where the protagonist is a young man in the early west. CALICO is such a book. A coming-of-age novel in the truest sense, the author weaves the deep emotional feelings of the protagonist, with the young man's attempt to carry out his duty ensuring the safe delivery of orphaned twins to their aunt. The task develops into one not as easy as he had first thought. As danger and intrigue surround them, the reader gains insight into Calico's personal feelings about the boy and girl in his care, and empathy for Calico, a man not only comfortable in his skin, but also content with who is his.

Dorien Grey's title character, Calico, is a likable, seemingly average cowboy. When he finds himself in the care of two seventeen-year-old orphans from the city -- a handsome young man and beautiful young woman-- however, we discover that he is both more likable and less average than would appear.

By shortly into the story, we have learned that despite being an orphan himself, he was raised well by his adopted uncle; by the time we are into the heart of the story, Calico has become the one person we would want to have at our own side in rough circumstances.

This might be a spoiler to some, but adding to the sometimes calamatous adventure and mystery in the story is the fact that Calico starts to fall mutually in love with one of the orphans... the brother.

Many might consider this an adult topic, but the story is told in very innocent terms. There are no overt sex scenes and the characters' restraint is palpable, making the romantic and physical moments that much more eventful.

On the limited negative side of this review, I was a bit -- but only a bit -- distracted by two things:

First, I found myself at times curious about possible anachronisms; not being a huge fan of westerns, I have very little knowledge about what would or wouldn't be common in the old west. Suffice it to say that nothing I questioned as anachronistic while reading the story caused any serious pause in my reading or my enjoyment of the story.

Second, on the topic of the book's physical production, it took me some time to get used to the book's typeface, which I felt was very narrow and difficult to read, particularly at first. Still, I never wanted to stop reading due to this issue either.

So while there have probably been countless m/m cowboy stories in the adult/erotic arena, this is the first book in the genre I have read with a tasteful, even wistful romanticism.

I would definitely enjoy reading more stories about Calico Ramsey, and I very much look forward to my next chance to read a work by Dorien Grey.

This book is about a man named Calico who finds himself in the midst of a gunfight when his adopted uncle inherits his twin niece and nephew, just shy of being adults. Calico knows something is amiss when Uncle Dan gets killed just before he was to pick up the twins, Josh and Sara, from the train station in Hutchinson.
Calico takes charge of the city-bred twins from Chicago and takes them to
Uncle Dan's sister, Rebecca, who lives in Bow Ridge, Colorado with her
husband, Mike. Calico becomes aware of the danger lurking just around the
corner when the first hotel he and the twins stay in burns up in flames. He
feels protective over the twins as the four thugs continue to be just ahead of them prepared to causer them hard.

The book comes to life and I found myself drawn to the old West with
cowboys, wagons, gunfights and small town saloons. I was impressed with
Grey's vivid descriptions of the characters and backgrounds. The story spans
from Hutchinson to Bow Ridge, Colorado as Calico and the twins make their
way to Rebecca while avoiding and fighting off the thugs. During their
adventure, the twins learn to adjust to the harsh living out in the country
and Calico learns more about himself. This book is about a different kind of
romance, but it's the kind of romance that feels natural. I recommend this
book for those who like to read western and those who are open minded. The
twist in the plot will sure to surprise you!

Reviewed by, Gracia L. Mason for CCR

"Civil War in the Ozarks" by Phillip W. Steele is an excellent read, and is written for the average reader who wants to gain a comprehensive knowledge of the Civil War. I enjoyed this book!

Treats some of the stories of the Civil War in the west without explaining the larger issues. This is an inexpensive book, but not necessarily a good value.

A "must read" for anyone interested in the Civil War in general, and the Civil War in the Ozarks region in particular. I especially liked Steele's writing style. Steele has a talent for delivering a lot of historical information while keeping the reader turning the pages wanting to know more. A very good book!

This book is designed for the average guy or gal off the street (from high school age to adult)to learn the bare basics about Ozarks Civil War heritage. Elite scholars may find it too simple, but hey... history belongs to all our citizens, not just professors and other professionals.

Recommend your read this one and recommend you add it to your collection. This work covers aspects of the Civil War often times overlooked. I is a wonderful starting place for a study of the War in this part of the country. Needless to say, it does need to be supplemented with further reading, but it is certainly a good start. Highly recommend

This is the definative biography of Nathan Bedford Forrest. Although it is clear that the author admires his subject, he provides a fair and balanced account of Forrest's life. The book is well written and thoroughly researched. If you are going to read one book on Forrest, this should be it.

Any time a writer fails to use all available sources the end result is always worthless.

The 1871 Congressional hearings of Forrest chaired by William Tecumseh Sherman regarding both Ft. Pillow and the KKK failed to support the author's tired repetition of the 1864 "investigation." Why stick with the wartime 1864 propaganda hearing when the later hearing disputed virtually everything previously assumed?

At Ft. Pillow Forrest took 39 USCT prisoner and turned them over to his commanders. He turned over 14 of the most grievously wounded surviving USCT to the Acting Master of the U.S. Steamer Silver Cloud (Federal Official Records).

Hardly the acts of a "massacre."

Same old tiring retelling of second-hand propaganda when first-hand contemporaneous sources are actually available.

Your Obedient Servant,

Colonel Michael Kelley, (...)
"I came here as a friend...let us stand together. Although we differ in color, we should not differ in sentiment." - LT Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest, CSA, Memphis, Tennessee - July, 1875

The Confederacy's Greatest Cavalryman : Nathan Bedford Forrest (Modern War Studies) by Brian Steel Wills is a fine biography of perhaps the most complicated and interesting leader of the Civil War. In describing Forrest it is difficult, if not impossible, to remain neutral. For those that love or hate him there is plenty of ammunition. However, Wills does a better than anticipated job taking the neutral course.

For those that view Forrest as the reincarnation of the Devil, there is plenty of evidence, and Wills covers most of it. Forrest was a crude, ruffian slave trader who would not think twice of killing a man who he believed showed him disrespect. As Willis writes, he was responsible for the massacre of Union troops at Fort Pillow. As a General he was brilliant when in independent command, but did not do well when working under someone elses command or part of a larger team. This failure limited his ability to have a greater impact on the course of the War. His failure to work with other Generals who he believed were inferior was part of the reason that the Union Army was able to escape destruction at Spring Hill.

On the other hand, Forrest was a brilliant tactician and a real leader of men. From leading his troops out of the encirclement at Fort Donaldson to his brilliant victory at Bryce Creek, Forrest was a fighter and a leader. Furthermore, if Hood had listened to Forrest after Spring Hill, and allowed Forrest to out flank the Union troops at Franklin, the battle of Franklin may have been a Confederate victory rather than a disaster.

Willis deftly moves between the several General Forrests. He seems not to have an agenda, giving the good with the bad. At least until the Civil War ends. While Wills does describe Forrest's contribution to the founding and growth of the Ku Klux Klan, he seems to hold his punches. However, that is a slight criticism. Al in all, this is a good book about one of the most interesting personalities in the Civil War.

I have read several biographies on Lee, Jackson, and Grant, but this is the first that I have read on N.B. Forrest. I thought the battle details were about right so as to instruct on what went on and to give insight to Forrest's great ability, but not so much as to bog down a reader who has not read much about warfare. I thought Wills was fair concerning the incident at Ft Pillow--he did not place the blame at Forrest's feet, but was sure that Forrest was not in total control of his men. I, personally, would liked to have had more detail about Forrest's deeds after the War Between the States. Some of Wills' comments seem to be a little vague, and at times he seemed to be jumping sides as to Forrest's involvement with the KKK. Overall, I did learn about this interesting man and am glad that I read this book. It was a good starting place for continued reading on General N.B. Forrest.

What I like about Wills book, besides the bio, is that it addresses why Forrest was often not in the main theater of operations during the crucial times of 1864. Forrest is well defined as a frontier planter whose strong belief in honor combined with an explosive action oriented temperament made him a ferocious opponent yet he was difficult as a subordinate except under the right conditions. In the case of the latter, Forrest literally offers to slap Braxton Bragg for his lack of action after Chickamauga and only fails to do so because in his estimation, Bragg was not a man thus not worthy of the challenge. Wills does an excellent compact bio of Forrest capturing the early life and his rise to success as a slave trader and planter to a private in the Confederate service to the immediate promotion of Colonel and on. All the daring raids are captured, aided by maps but aside from Shiloh and Chickamauga, the only truly large operation Forrest was involved with was Hood's march to Nashville where the inexplicable Spring Hill disaster is laid at Forrest's feet unfairly when Hood had responsibility of creating a sufficient force to stop Schofield's escape. The tremendous work ethic combined with his fearlessness and temper is described throughout the book including Forrest's post war life and business. Forrest does amazingly well defending his Mississippi, Tennessee and Alabama sector with a relative small force culminating in his great victory at Brices Crossroads. Wills includes Forrest's post war career with an example of Forrest's feared temper by describing a railroad meeting where one of Forrest's engineers starts the discussion with a loaded pistol on the table in case the company President, Forrest, intended a violent interruption. Although not captured in gross detail, Forrest's role at the infamous Fort Pillow is described in sufficient detail along with Forrest's post war role in the Ku Klux Klan. The role of the Klan is described as an attempt to maintain a retaliatory police force against over stepping radicals and to force former slaves into roles as cheap labor and as a channeled political force obviously through violence if deemed necessary. The association with Forrest seems quite clear but murky before congress. One thing is very clear in this bio, if Forrest was involved, he had to lead the action, or he otherwise was not interested. A most feared adversary, inventive, unpredictable and incredibly daring leading his men wherever he wanted them to go. As Wills points out, how unfortunate he rarely had a suitable commander to follow in larger campaigns and he was not used effectively during Sherman's initial march to Atlanta. If he was, Sherman would not have got there until at last 1865. The book is approximately 381 pages, maps and pictures and another 100 pages of notes and index. The book is endorsed by the late Emory M. Thomas (The Last cavalier), Dr. James I. Robertson, Jr. (Stonewall Jackson: The Man, the Soldier, the Legend) and William C. Davis (The Lost Cause).

KCBS has put together a great book here. Mostly for the beginning smoker however. It has wonderful recipes from the top bbq cookers around the circuit. These are proven award winning recipes and will help any wanna be bbq chef turn out a great product. If you follow the tips and tricks in this book it will help you avoid a lot of mistakes and headaches.

While this book may come from a barbecue society it mostly deals with grilling instead of smoking. In addition, quite a few of the recipes lacked critical details. The "Champion's" recipes were laughable. I was hoping for more than: Blue Ribbon Brisket: Ingredient list: 7-10 pound brisket trimmed, barbecue rub. Instructions: Season meat with rub, cook at 225 degrees until done. The side and dessert recipes were interesting, but that's not what I buy a barbecue book for

If you buy this book, you wont learn how to BBQ. It doesnt cover enough (or any) on selecting meat, selecting the BBQ smoker, proper cooking technique, etc. But what you do get, that makes this a worthwhile purchase, is a huge amount of great recipies. Where else can you be be looking for BBQ sidedishes like potato salad and coleslaw, and find multiple recipies of each?

This is a FANTASTIC BOOK. It has a great deal of useable recipes in it. Unlike alot of cookbooks that just have a few. I highly recomend this cookbook. Would give it 10 stars if i could.Happy Barbecueing. It's time to fire up the Weber Smokey Mountain Smoker.

An absolutely wonderful kitchen tool for anyone who likes rubs, sauces and BBQ. My husband and I use this book religiously at least once a week and everything is great! The sauces and seasonings work well with all types of meat! BBQ certainly isn't just for breakfast anymore!

Being a long time reader of California history the title of the book carried me into significant anticipation. Unfortunately, this is an unmitigated bad book. At the very least, duplicitous. The author claims write about the `evolution from Mexican outpost to...crown jewel of America's western empire." There's barely a mention let alone a description of such a cultural phenomenon.

Instead, the author spends a great deal of time on Chinatown and the Chinese culture. By this, you would think California and San Francisco was once a Chinese province rather than Mexico's northern most territory.

The author wholly fabricated California. Not worth a read.

Barbara Berglund's wonderful new book let's us see the kind of people who made San Francisco fun, as well as fascinating. She takes the standard histories of the City by the Bay, turns them upside down and gives us a way to look at San Francisco that has never been done before. An important book for any bookshelf devoted to the city's history.

At last, a new interpretation of the San Francisco history we all know and love! It was refreshing to see Ms. Berglund explain how the masculine, multi-cultural frontier town evolved into an American City. We often read about the dominant personages and the gold rush phenomenon, but this book looks at the every day activities of the boarding houses and restaurants, the fairs and amusements and explains how race, class and gender figured into our culture. Brava!

Just when you thought there was nothing new to be said about 19th and early 20th century San Francisco, along comes Barbara Berglund with this splendid and readable book. By examining how the city's social elites turned the cultural stew of the Gold Rush years into a stratified society more in keeping with national norms, Berglund changes the way we think about San Francisco and the stereotypes that still color its character. Using places of amusement, hotels, restaurants and other "cultural frontiers" as her guide, Berglund takes us on a fascinating ride through San Francisco history and brings us to the present with a greater understanding of one of the pivotal cities of the American West.

We all know (well, most of us) what today's city by the bay looks like and even feels like. For the story on how San Francisco got this way -- and you should want to know this, too -- you must read this wonderfully researched report. From brothels to museums, it's all here. And barely a century old!

I grew up in the Niagara Frontier but I only knew of these battles by the plaques on the side of the road or rare weekend visits to the old forts. This is a professional and thorough treatment of a history that was all around me, hidden no longer. Thanks for this book and the excellent work Dr. Barbuto.

I found Mr Barbuto's book well written and very easy reading.
He not only covers the personalities and strategies of the 1814 campaign but also reviews each engagement from both British and American points of very, opportunities lost, blunders as well as succesful strategies and places all in the context of the personalities involved.
The only shortfall may be alittle slowness to the beginning of the book as Mr Barbuto sets the stage and puts the action in context.

This is a reasonably well researched book on the 1814 Niagara campaign. It's good to see that the War of 1812 is finanlly beginning to receive some of the attention that the Revolution and the Civil War has always received in US History. Despite the reviews that state this is an unbiased account of the pivital campaign fought on the Niagara Peninsular in 1814, I found Mr. Barbuto's account suffered from pro-American sentiments, even if they are were more subtle than Elting's earlier work on the war.

Barbuto's main thesis seems to be that the American militia gave a better account of itself in the war than most historians give them credit for. Is this a valid point? He cites the battle of Chippewa as one example where Porter's militia roughly handled the British-lead Indians and Canadian Militia, but even still the US Militia broke when confronted by Pearson's Light companies. Scott had to use Jesup's 25th Infantry to cover his left flank during the battle after Porter's militia were streaming to the rear. Granted, the militia did better here, but they still could not stand up to regulars.

At Lundy's Lane Porter's 300 odd men from his brigade gave a pretty good account of themselves, but the were defending, always easier for militia to do, and in the end along with the rest of the US army they retired from the field giving Drummund's battered British regulars a hard fought victory.

Under Gaines at the sortie of Fort Erie the Militia did manage to overrun some British gun emplacements, but the battle becomes a confused affair in the rain, and the British reserves from the 6th & 82nd foot shatter the American militia with heavy vollies as they mill around in the captured British works. The fighting also took place in broken ground and was not a stand up fight, also more favorable circumstances for US militia. These facts are
not mentioned in Barbuto's work. The American militia can do adequately when properly lead, but even on these occasions they really can't stand up to British regulars, as much as Mr. Barbuto would like to make us think they could.

The book spends a lot of time going over the first two years of the war. I thought a bit too much time was used covering this background information which can be found in many of the other general histories on this conflict. Also, the author repeated information in this background study.

The main strength of this work is the operational perspective it provides on the Niagara campaign. Barbuto's work is basically a study of the campaign's background, preparation and exicution. As such it succeeds adequately. But those seeking a more detailed description on the major battles of Chippewa, Lundy's Lane and Fort Erie should read Donald Grave's work on these subjects. Where Mr. Barbuto excels is in his analysis of the battles and how they shaped the 1814 campaign. He provides cogent reasons for why certian decisions were made, and how they influenced events. This to me is the main strength of this book, which sets it apart from the geneal histories of the conflict.

Barbuto gives too much attention trying to prove that the American army was the equal to the British after Scott's intensive training. Again, the only clear-cut victory of the campaign in the open is at Chippewa, where Scott's spendid brigade bests the British in a fair firefight. At Fort Erie they do heavily repulse the British assult, but this is not a fair fight in the open. Fortunately Barbuto does not make the twin mistakes of claiming the British attacked in colume or that they
were routed at Chippewa. At Lundy's Lane the Americans fought hard, but in the end they retreated and give up the guns they captured from the British. Even at Fort Erie where Gaine's sortie makes initial progress, the attack bogs down and the British repulse the attack.

Given these circumstances it is difficult to support Mr. Barbuto's claim that after Chippewa American regulars and militia never gave ground again. In this regard the author allows his nationalism to unbalance his perspective somewhat.

Despite these drawbacks, this is still a worthwhile overview of the 1814 campaign. There is a lot of information about US regiments and leaders, while somewhat less on British units and their commanders. The perspective is mostly seen from the American side, with some attempts to describe what the British were doing. Probably for the most detailed and non-biased accounts of the battles of 1814 Donald Graves remains the best, but Barbuto has made a worthwhile effort. It would be nice if he or another author might do the same analysis on the 1812 or 1813 campagns, but few American historians want to study this embarrassing aspect of the war in any depth! Can we blame them!Deffinitely a good buy for War of 1812 fans if the slight pro-American bias is taken into account.

I can't rate this book because I haven't read it. However, in your introduction you state that Richard Barbuto is the first to write a comprehensive history of the War of 1812, which -- unless you really mean the first American writer to do so -- is not true. Pierre Berton, Canada's best-known writer of history, wrote a two-volume, comprehensive history of the war some 15-20 years ago. And he was resolutely neutral in his approach to the subject -- Mr. Barbuto would certainly have read that work in the course of his research and would probably agree with me.

I know that Pierre Berton approached a number of U.S. publishers after his work became a best seller in Canada. All turned him down because, they said, it did not take an American point of view; it was too neutral.

I'm not in any way trying to demean Mr. Barbuto or his work, just remind my American neighbors once again that we're part of this continent, too. We share with you both its history and the experience of living here. When we write about that experience, as we frequently do (and do so capably and conscienciously) we deserve to have our efforts recognized, even if your own book publishers don't think you'll appreciate our point of view.

Sincerely,

Jerry Lawton

RICH BARBUTO IS MY DAD. HE GAVE ME A COPY OF HIS BOOK FOR ONE OF MY SCHOOL BOOK REPORTS. THE FIRST SEVEN CHAPTERS PUT ME TO SLEEP. BUT AFTER THAT I COOULDNT PUT IT DOWN. AS ONE OF THE PUBLISHER'S REVIEWERS SAID " ANY PERSON INTERESTED IN THE WAR OF 1812 OR ANY MILITARY HISTORY REALLY SHOULD READ IT. IT WAS RATHER LONG FOR AGE, BUT I REALLY LOVED IT.

A.F. BARBUTO

I'm 12 years old and and I thoroughly enjoyed this action packed story. I watched the Disney video,and it was very fun. Travis and old Yeller worked hard to take care of the family farm. They have several hair-raising experiences. My favorite part was when Old yeller has a do-or-die fight with a mad wolf.
Through it all Travis shows his good character qualities. He is a great role model for young boys. I highly recommend the book.

Old Yeller is a great book for younder kids. However, for an eighth grader, the book sucks. The best part is the bull fighting part. The worst part is when the dog dies.

Man i have not have had so much fun reading a book. The stary about a boy and his dog, but not a ordinary dog. The best book i have read

This story about a family surviving after the Civil War. It is also about a boy and his dog Old Yeller.Travis, the boy, becomes the man of the house when his father leaves for Kansas.

Travis is faced with some hard times. He does his best to protect his family and keep the promise he made to his
father.Old Yeller proves to be a great friend and helps Travis.

My favorite part of the story was when Travis watched two bulls fighting. As he sat on the fence the bulls pushed through the fence and got caught in an iron tire the bulls ran away.Travis laughed and laughed to see such tough bulls get scared and run.

I would recommend this story to anyone that likes dogs. Old Yeller was a very smart dog. It is a story about how a family sticks together. The story would be of interest to most people of any age.

The three of us, fifth graders from Vernon Hill School in Worcester, read the book Old Yeller. We thought the book was interesting but it could have been better because the beginning was slow. It got better towards the end. Our favorite part was when Travis got his leg sliced open by the hog. We liked this part because it had alot of action in it. We didn't like the part when he died.

An insightful tale of two young women--Lydia Fulgate, the widowed American, and her friend, Charlotte Duret, a charming French woman who has lost her inheritance--who team up to start a new life in the wastelands of post-Civil War Kansas. Far more than a feminist statement, the novel uses subtle humor, nicely-handled romance, and historic details to address the price of questioning the status-quo. In my book, a winner!

This is a haunting book, beautifully written and fully realized. Reminiscent of Willa Cather in the fineness of the detail. I love the way Ms. Lehrer writes.

I love this novel-it was very real and so sad! While easy to read and engrossing, the story moved quickly and the author never let on about the deep study of human character she was presenting-friendships, despair, love and hate are all explored so easily.

I am a Kansan, and interested in Kansas women of the late 1800's. This novel intrigued me, but I am not sure how historical it is. I found the story riveting and facinating, but I did not care for Mrs. Lehrers style of writing, it was confusing and I often had to stop to figure out who was thinking/talking, and re read sections that I felt were unclear. However, it is an interesting study in friendships, human relationships, and womans rights. I stayed up late two nights in a row to finish this book, despite the fact that some of it was hard for me to follow--that is how compelling the story is. Two women, one French, one American, disheartened by romance and their way of life in Paris, make their way to Kansas to establish a new society and search for their inner selves. They fight Kansas weather, and local establishment, which while not the same as the establishment they left behind in social Paris, still formidable in its own right. At times I felt they had started a commune. If you are interested in novels about relationships between women and humans in general, then this may be a good read for you.

I could never believe that these two ladies made it to Kansas. I had a hard time believing that they were in Paris also and I don't know anything about Paris in the 1800's. The real tale that this story was based on would have been more interesting. I live in Kansas. You have to be tough to live here even today. In our state the population of farm animals is much higher than the human population. I would bet that Kate Lehrer has never worked as a farm laborer to understand what is

involved. She had the facts, but not the heart. No one here in the sunflower state doubts for a moment that strong independent minded women lead the way in the pioneer movement and in the right to vote. A true glimpse of this person is depicted in the statue on the state capital grounds. It shows you a woman boldly going forward with baby at her breast, a gun and a Bible in hand, and a plow beside her. Charlotte and Lydia only gave me the idea that they knew how to talk. Save your money and buy something else worth reading.

Throughout history, no presidential administration needed to be given more benefit of the doubt than that of Gerald Ford. While other administrations had to come into existence as a consequence of death by natural causes or assassination, only Ford had to follow a person who resigned in disgrace. The political atmosphere was forever changed by the actions of Richard Nixon, as the American public no longer took the word of the president on faith. Jimmy Carter, who defeated Ford in the next election, made a simple, effective campaign pledge, "I will never lie to the American people."
However despite all of those problems, the sheer resilience and strength of the American political system was demonstrated, and that is the main theme of the book. Yes, Ford had his faults and probably could not have otherwise gained the presidency, but he is a good man and was the right person for the times. As someone addicted to the political theater, I was mesmerized by Watergate, disgusted with Nixon and sometimes laughed at Ford. And yet, I still liked him, and do so even more now that I have read this book. Given all the political problems, Ford did many things about as well as could be done. His downfall was the one really big mistake that he made, namely the premature pardon of Nixon.
Had he waited longer to issue the pardon, more could have come out, tensions would have been eased and the act would not have been quite so controversial. While I know why he did it, I will never understand why he felt he had to do it so soon. The behaviors of Nixon even as the pardon was being discussed and described in the book are amazing, showing a man who was still contemptuous of the political system. A delayed pardon may have altered that.
Gerald Ford was not a great president in terms of great accomplishments, initiatives or rhetoric. However, he was and is a decent man who was forced to pick up after an indecent one. For that reason he needs to be respected for what he did, helped make the political system work. This description of his presidency is a tribute to that decency and I encourage you to read it and pay a little more attention to him the next time you see him speak. I know I will.

Greene adroitly recognizes that Ford's domestic legislative proposals faced staunch opposition from a Democratically controlled Congress. In foreign affairs, Ford failed to get SALT II ratified and an Egyptian-Israeli accord never materialized during his term. In addition, the author acknowledges that Ford used assertiveness in the Mayaguez incident. Furthermore, Greene avers that Ford received bad publicity from the press. Finally, Greene argues that Ford did not make a secret bargain with Nixon for a Presidential pardon. This book gives a balanced account about a much maligned President.

This book is a well-researched and thought provoking book. It is the best book on a bad subject. The author obviously knows what he is talking about, sometimes to the detriment of the reader. Very in-depth. This is NOT the place to start for a study of Gerald Ford. It may be the place to end.

Gerald Ford is not the most popular of presidents to write about. He's almost forgotten in studies of America after 1945. This book gives him his due. Profesor Greene does a fine job of examing the important issues that faced Ford, like "stagflation," the Mayaguez incident, and dealing with the Cold War. It's a balanced account and written for scholars and the general reader.

Gerald Ford is our most underrated modern president. Many books have, and continue to be, written on Nixon, Carter and Reagan, but few on Ford. This work helps one to both grasp and understand the pros and cons of Ford's tenure, as well as the turbulent, uncertain mid 70s. I came away seeing Gerald Ford as a competent man, and a solid president. I believe this very good book could have been better in one area. Greene, like Kissinger, Leslie Stahl, Tip Oneil, et. al., focuses on Ford the healer. To me this limits the work, as Ford's policies have grown in stature after two decades of review. His focus on a balanced budget , and his veto activity to that end, stand in sharp contrast to words and non-deeds ofhis successors. His handling of the Mayaguez incident helped re-establish presidential power over the lopsided war powers act. As well, Ford's signing the Helsinki agreements over opposition helped bring an end to the Soviet Union--a human rights stand that gave Carter a foundation for his work. I believe the nation would have been better off with a Ford victory in 1976. Overall, Greenes work should be read by anyone wanting to study Ford's presidency. It is a valuable resource on an era few have studied.

No study of Reconstruction has ever offered such a perceptive comparative analysis. The sole critic among these reviews appears to have something of an obsession with the author, as evidenced on the Yahoo Discussion Group "civilwarhistory2." That's unfortunate. Read and decide for yourself.

Anyone who knows anything about Reconstruction would agree that it began during the Civil War: Lincoln himself spoke of his Reconstruction proposals. Setting aside tripe from neo-Confederate propaganists and KKK defenders, I'd read the book and judge for yourself.

Reconstruction was AFTER Lincoln. Someone needs to point this out to Mr. Simpson. Andrew Johnson attempted to do the same type of Reconstruction Lincoln wanted, "let'em up easy". The Radicals hated Johnson, as Johnson turned out NOT to be their puppet, and he REALLY was a Democrat. Simpson feels the need to bash Johnson, as HIS HERO, GENERAL Grant,[look at his books] was the NEXT President. According to Simpson Grant was in fact one of the BEST Presidents!! (Right!!!LOL) Finally, Simpson pushes all the blame on those Southern people. Get real Mr. Simpson, contrary to your writing, (just because YOU write something, does NOT mean it is fact), the South was not wearing black hats, and the North was not wearing white hats. This book is full of anti-southern propaganda, hoping gullible readers will take it as fact. It's a waste of money. I give it only one star, as I can't give it a zero, which it deserves.

Simpson makes us wonder what Lincoln's post-war policies would have been, had a carriage accident kept him from his appointment at Ford's Theatre on April 14, 1865. How would he have resolved the conflict between two of his goals, reconciling the (white) elites of North and South on the one hand, protecting the newly freed men and women on the other? What would "reconstruction" have meant to him? In his second inaugural address, Lincoln spoke of "malice toward none" and "charity for all." But that is an aspiration, not a program. Would it have been possible to act in a way that both the old plantation aristocracy and their former chattels would have regarded as charitable?! Simpson reminds us that by the end of 1865, President Johnson and the Republican Party had gone their separate ways. The leaders of the party, firmly in control of Congress, theorized that the states that had seceded had committed a sort of juridical 'suicide' and could only be restored to life when it, the Congress, thought they had proven their fitness. In the meantime, military occupation and control would continue. That was a difficult policy to pursue, though, if the commander in chief of that military thought reconstruction ought to end, the freedmen left to their fate in the face of the Klan. Congress tried to address this situation by ensuring that it had in the President's cabinet a friendly secretary of war, thus short-circuiting the chain of command. Johnson is in many ways the "heavy" of Simpson's reading of the period. Simpson is, accordingly, sympathetic to the difficulties faced by the leaders of that Congress and to their eventual decision to end those difficulties through the extraordinary process of impeachment and trial. All in all, this is not a perfect, but it is a fascinating, book.

One of the most intriguing possibilities one can surrender to is the notion of how history may have differed if consequences were altered. The Reconstruction Presidents examines the lives of the 4 men faced with the challenge of tightening the newly formed knot of the once more Unified States. Beginning with Lincoln, who may have had the vision of the plan before a precise bullet wound dimmed it, Simpson ponders how reconstruction may have begun under Lincoln's reign. With the abrupt arrival of Andrew Johnson and his blatently racist views, reconstruction was lost during these formidable years. The torch passed to Ulysses Grant, who lives in infamy as one of the nation's least effective presidents. He was forced to clean up the damage and mistrust done by Johnson and unify not only blacks and whites, but political and demographic groups alike avoiding the chance of offending any particular group. Simpson poses the question, if Grant had not been in office, who would have and where would the country have gone? I enjoyed the notion of perhaps reanalyzing Grant's presidency. The least known, Rutherford B. Hayes, some would say was the benefactor of a nation willing to surrender and come together. Simpson presents a man who may not be remembered in history by the common citizen, but makes him no less important. An interesting viewpoint on a debated subject.