Politics Government Books

From an educational philosophy standpoint, I completely agree with Bauer that grammar-age students (grades 1 - 4) need a chance to learn and practice the mechanics of writing before adding in the variable of creating original content with complete sentences, correct grammar, and proper punctuation. To this end, her beginning levels use copywork and dictation to expose the student to complete sentences with correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation. If your child enjoys original writing, by all means allow it (at a separate time), but it is NOT required. In this way, the creation of original things to say (in complete sentences) is separated from the actual mechanics of writing. Removal of this variable simplifies the learning process and eases the burden on the young writer.

From a personal standpoint, I began homeschooling with a 2nd grader, and we completed all 200 lessons in one year (the book is intended to be used for both 1st and 2nd grade). The level 3 book was not yet available, so we then switched over to Rod & Staff grammar & writing as the author recommended in another of her books "The Well-Trained Mind." Rod and Staff is thorough and perfectly adequate, but I much prefer Bauer's style of teaching writing and grammar. Peace Hill Press indicates that Bauer intends to eventually prepare levels from grades 1 - 12. I heartily recommend her program to everyone.

I bought this to use with my almost 6 year old as part of our homeschool curriculum and I love it. The lessons are short, we usually only take about 5-10 minutes per lesson. They are set up for easy use by the instructor and my son likes to do the lessons. I would recommend this to anyone, especially if you are at all intimidated about teaching your child about the English language.

Most of us really like this book. We use this book in our homeschool family. It is simple, straight forward and not labor intensive for parent or child. This is a great grammer program. After looking at some of the not so flattering comments about this book, I decided to inspect it for myself. YES, they do change some of the wording in the poems. If this presents a problem for you, look up the originals online and make your choice at that time. YES, it is repetative, however, my child has been tested by our local public school and has been designated as "gifted" -- the repetition can be altered to fit your childs individual needs. YES, it is scripted, which allows for ease of use. If you do not need this type of curriculum, you can use it as a spine. FINALLY, I have compared this book to (3) three other curriculums -- Abeka, Bob Jones and Sonlight -- all are thorough in there presentations and FLL stacks up quite nicely when you do an apples to apples comparison of what your child will learn over the course of a school year! Our family has homeschooled for a total of 18 years and I have graduated 2 children who have successfuly gone onto college and our state university. I can confidently say, that your first and second grader will be well served with this book alone, or as a supplement to another grammer program of your choosing and finally, you can choose it as a summer brush-up program. BLESSINGS!

I just recieved this book in the mail the other day and after thumbing through it a little while, I've decided I really like it. Now, I did find a poem or two where the wording is not the original, hence the 4 star rating. I didn't find this issue problematic, I just looked up the original poem online, printed it out and stuck it in my book. Doing this allowed me the oppotunity to find out some extra information on the actual poet, which was helpful, and I plan on sharing that information with my child.
I love how the author (Jesse Wise) states that we tend to underestimate what our young children are capable learning. This book is all about exposing the child to grammar, mastery is not expected at this level. I'm excited to get started with this book. It's simply done, and seems very easy going, not a stressful grammar program at all. Which makes it really fun for both parent and child.

When selecting a language arts curriculum for our child I ordered a copy of "First Language Lessons." After examining the curriculum I returned my copy for a refund. Jessie Wise has taken Emma Serl's books "Primary Language Lessons and Intermediate Language Lesson" given them a few twists to create her own book of language lessons. The book consists of mindless twaddle. Wise does not use true "narration" which is having a child repeat back to you in their own words what they have learned. The lessons are monotonuous and have been "dumbed down" from Serl's original text. The poems and stories have been altered to make them "politically correct." Serl's text is a breath of fresh air, engaging the child in language arts with classical literature and poetry. I was quite disappointed in this curriculum as I had expected a higher standard from Jessie Wise. The two language arts curriculums I recommend to parents are "Learning Language Arts Through Literature" published by Commom Sense Press and Emma Serl's "Primary Language Lessons and Intermediate Language Lessons." Both of these curriculums will serve a student well, giving them a firm foundation in language arts.

This book though old but was a revelation for me. I have become a huge fan of Mr. Noam Chomsky and by reading this book (still reading) of Mr. Edward Herman. The best about the book is that the work is mostly based on Hard Facts and proved by relevant documents etc. This also terrifies one that how media is changing minds and achieving something which could not be possible that easily. My limited knowledge on the subject is holding me to write more. WONDERFUL WORK.

Faisal Khan

Quite simply, this book will open your eyes to alot that goes on right in front of them. Many would say this is a conspiracay theory, but we know conspiracies do happen. Chomsky highlights just how the government can assert its control on an unknowing populace. Nietzsche said that if you are raising a population of slaves, it would be madness to teach them to be the masters; I recommend that anyone who does not want to live their life as an automoton, that is, if you are someone who questions things and does not simply accept things on blind faith, read this book. (I give this book only four stars because there are other topics which capture my attention much more; but nonetheless, if you only read a handful of books in your life, this should be one of them!)

Though I have not finished this book yet (I'm taking my time to understand many of Chomsky's more subtle points -- as usual) it seems just as applicable to me today as when he wrote it. However, I would love to see a follow up book discussing how the technologies that have matured since he wrote this have affected his main point.

Chomsky, if you're reading ... please write an updated version. I'd like to see what you think of people like google, the web 2.0 movement and the way many people are now getting their information from even more questionable sources and how large media conglomerates can now plant information on the Web even more easily than they could broadcast it on the air before.

You'll never see the mass media the same again. This book shouldn't make you hate the evening news or your local paper, but it will force you to see them with a more critical eye. A healthy dose of skepticism.

Hey folks,

If you're out there considering buying this book, please know that it might prove to be one of the most important books you'll ever read.

You might realize that our government isn't always straightfoward with us. You might even have noticed the lack of objective and complete news reporting that is prevailing with the media these days. This book will show you how our government, large corporations, and the media work in concert to keep Americans in the dark about things that affect our most vital interests. It sounds like a conspiracy theory, I know--because that's the reaction we've all been conditioned to have about material like this. However, every fact in this book is verifiable. Please take the time to read it!!

I also highly recommend Blowback by Chalmers Johnson.

Read these books--learn to see past the propaganda we are inundated with daily!

This is one of the best textbooks I have read for a while. It's informative, but easy to understand and to study from.

I received my book on time and in great condition!! Better than I had expected! Thank you!!

If you are looking for a textbook for upper-division classes on Congress, this is the one. It is thorough, full of interesting stories and examples, it's not too long, and it's easy to read. Oh, and it has lots of pictures! If you want to know how the US Congress works, this is the best text I've seen.

I have ordered this book in its many editions for classes that I have taught on Congress and Legislative Politics. It is one of the best general texts available--and readily accessible to those who are simply interested in the politics of Congress.

One of the key points made by the authors is that there are "two Congresses": One of these is the Congress of "how a bill becomes a law," of the actions and politics characteristic of Capitol Hill. The other is the operation of representatives in their home districts, acting on behalf of their constituents, "the folks back home." The two worlds that members of Congress live in (Washington D. C. and "back home") can produce tensions and dilemmas for members of the legislature. But these conflicts help us to understand the complex nature of Congressional politics and decision-making.

Lawmakers cannot just live in the one Congress or the other. They must navigate and negotiate between the two.

This text covers the full territory, from the history of Congress, to how one ends up getting elected to Congress, to how Congress works and its interactions with other key political actors, to the policy process of which Congress is a key.

For anyone--students or citizens--interested in the nature of Congress, this represents a good starting point.

This is probably the best textbook on Congress for undergraduates that I have seen. Primarily I like it because it's easy to read and very well written, covers all the important topics, and is not tedious. Now you might think being easy to read isn't important since it's for college students. But believe me, if you want students to actually read the assignment, more engaging texts are important.

"Congress and Its Members" is an excellent textbook for any government student wanting a thorough introduction into the actions and events of the United States' Senate and House of Representatives. The discussion found in the book ranges from the differences between the two houses, their procedures, methods of governance, etc... This book is very easy to read and comprehend what the authors convey.

This nation owes a debt of gratitude to Gary Webb. The same people responsible for Iran Contra are still among us.

I did not purchase this product for myself, but my boyfriend really likes the book.

The book is packed with information on an intriguing and eye-opening subject matter. Gary Webb cites what appears to be legitimate references adding credibility to the story's claims. The abundance of information did become overwhelming at times. Although after completing the book I found myself thinking "Right, wrong or indifferent...It all makes perfect sense. There's nothing not to believe about it."

Mr Webb's book here ties in with Rodney
Stich's Flying the Unfriendly Skies and
Bo Gritz troika of bokks during this era!

Every time the news reports a homicide even remotely connected to crack (and this would include most gang related murders, even to this day..), they should mention the international crack trade and its role. This will never happen, obviously, which is why we need people like the late Gary Webb in this country.

My only problem with the book, it goes into detail a bit too extensive for my attention span. But there's an obvious reason for this; the book is primarily written to back up his news story in which the mainstream press vilified him for, accusing him of unsubstantiated claims. The full circle detail is necessary. Fortunately, Webb is a good enough writer where even someone with no more than a high school education, like myself, can hang in there and read the entire book without resorting to skimming over paragraphs. Just when I start to say to myself, "alright, got it, we know these guys are contras, we know they're dope runners...what now?", the question is seemingly answered in the following paragraph. I don't know if a writer could have done a better job balancing the act of exhausting resources and laying all of them into full detail and making the book understandable to a lay person like me.

One of the most important books ever written on government corruption and its effect on it's citizenry. As you're reading this review, crack cocaine is still eating American inner cities alive. Rest in Peace, Gary Webb. And may your courageous reporting echo through this country as long as poor American communities suffer from this pandemic.

Delivered early. Great condition. Good delivery info provided. I'll do it again.

I'm currently doing a History course for the IB. A reasonable percentage of final grade orignates from my internal Assessment.

For this i need two realiable sources. This source proved itself to be very helpful and explanatory for it is written in a manner that the reader wants to always know more. The book explains why the Soviet put Nuclear Missiles in Cuba how the Jupiter Missiles influenced this and at the end, it shows how the Americans were able to make the Soviets withdraw their missiles form Cuba.

An execellent book. I recommend!

Reading "Essence of Decision" resonates with Kurosawa, or maybe Stoppard. We have a central story - one of the great non-events in human history, the moment when the Soviet Union and the United States "came eyeball to eyeball" (as Dean Rusk is said to have said) before someone blinked. We hear it three times: one, from the standpoint of the "rational actor;" second from the internal logic of organizations; and third, from the perspective of politics where people more or less rub along together.

It's an event that bears retelling and, with qualification, the device works. The upshot is that we get some insight into the missile crisis. But not at all incidentally, we get some insight into the academic study of politics (I resist calling it "political science"), and a whiff of what it might have to offer for our better understanding of the world.

Aside from the Kurusowa effect, there is another structural innovation. We have, in a sense, two books interleaved, like Faulkner's "Wild Palms." The even-numbered chapters tell (and retell) the basic story. The odd-numbered chapters offer a framework of "theory."

I suppose you might read just the even-numbered chapters - indeed the authors themselves suggest as much, though rather half-heartedly. And indeed, the odd-numbered chapters can be heavy going. One cannot help recalling the old canard about the sociologist as a person who gets a government research grant to find the bordello next door. You are tempted to say that their theory is what sophisticated people know anyway, and the clueless will probably never figure out.

But there is an answer to this dismissal. That is: most (or at least) a lot of history gets told from the standpoint of the "rational actor." A survey of the competing approaches makes it clear just what this approach leaves out. And if the polyphonic approach is so obviously superior to the single narrative line, then why have historians from Thucydides to Henry Kissinger been willing to do without it? One answer might be: for all their talents, they simply haven't learned the way to tell a story in any other way.

So on the whole, retelling works. But not, perhaps, as well as it might. Another reviewer has said that this isn't really a case to illustrate "organization" theory here because this is not a case that highlights organizations - rather, at least for the United States, the response to the Cuban missile crisis was the work of a small group of men, working together in close cooperation. There is some merit to this view: concededly, you do not get the clash of bull elephants that you might have got at another time when Defense makes war on State, and both work together to fend of Intelligence. But you get a taste of it: we find that the Joint Chiefs were most hospitable to an invasion; that State thought that maybe we could talk it through; and that John McCone from the CIA was the one person who most clearly anticipated the threat. Moreover, you see the "organization" problem in a somewhat different light, when you see how the President's orders were massaged or modified by the military (sometimes, even, within the military).

But perhaps in any event, I need not get too distracted by the framework. Along the way, there are any number of nuggets that stand pretty well on their own. I liked in particular, for instance, the discussion of the role of committee work. We tend to stick up our nose at any project done by committee. But, argue our authors, in World War II it was Churchill, high-handed as he was, who worked through committee-and virtually always followed the committee's advice. The "strong leader" who kept things close to his vest, was Hitler.

But more generally - I was already an adult at the time of the Cuban missile crisis, and I remember it well. Specifically, I remember how frightened were so many people in my surroundings. I wasn't that frightened; I figured that one way or another, we would rub along. In the end, of course, I was right - we did rub along. But I think in retrospect, it was I who was kidding myself and the Nervous Nellies who had the right attitude. We did rub along, but as Wellington said about the Battle of Waterloo, it was a near thing. I particularly like Robert Kennedy:

"The fourteen people [in the American inner circle] were very significant-bright, able, dedicated people, all of whom had the greatest affection for the U.S. ... If six of them had been President of the U.S., I think that the world might have been blown up."

[Final technical note: one or more of the other reviews appear to be discussing the first edition of this book. The (current) seocnd edition is not a mere cosmetic update, but substantially a new book].

A great number of books and articles has been published attempting to explore and explain the Cuban missile crisis that had brought the world to the brink of a thermonuclear world war. Allison and Zelikow, in Essence of Decision, explain the Cuban missile crisis through three different lenses, that is, The Rational Actor Paradigm, Organizational Behavior Paradigm and Governmental Politics Paradigm, each of which is based on a different set of assumptions, each of which has a distinct bundle of organizing concepts and, each of which brings different general/specific propositions for the issue under question. Allison and Zelikow investigate the Cuban missile crisis through the lenses of three models in turn by asking three simple questions:

1. Why did the Soviet Union decide to place offensive missiles in Cuba?
2. Why did the United States respond to the missile deployment with a blockade?
3. Why did the Soviet Union withdraw the missiles?

The analyst looking to Cuban missile crisis through the lens of "rational actor model" conceives of governmental action as a "choice" made by a unitary and rational nation or national government. In this model, national government is treated as if it is an "individual" identifying problem, producing solution alternatives and picking one of those alternatives up whose result would satisfy the expected utility function of the nation best based on the "purpose" of the nation. The rational actor model analyst generates hypotheses, for example, about why the Soviet Union decided to send nuclear missiles to Cuba: to defend Cuba, rectify the nuclear strategic balance, or provide an advantage in the confrontation over Berlin? The virtue of the model comes from its power of explanation especially in case it is able to expose the "purpose" of the nation/state. So all the puzzling pieces of the relevant issue under question are to be tied into a coherent and satisfactory story.

The rational actor model falls short of fully understanding of the issue under question in that it does not take account of other equally important considerations. Admittedly, the rational actor model neglects the organizational processes and capabilities that structure the issue or problem under question, and, limit or extend the policy alternatives available to "rational" policy actors. In final instant, it is manifest that policy executives have to decide policy alternative from the "menu" that current organizational technologies and capabilities write. In organizational behavior model, the analyst investigates, for example, the standard operating procedures (SOP) of government organizations in order to understand which policy alternatives are available to political actors and which one is chosen and why. So, the organizational behavior paradigm closes the gaps of the rational actor paradigm.

Finally, the governmental politics model conceives of governmental policy under question not as a rational actor choice or organizational output but as a "resultant" of bargaining along regular circuits among players positioned hierarchically within the government. In this model, the political actors and their intentions, positions and interests, their relative power, the action channels through which the political actors input and exert their influence, decision rules and similar matters stand to the fore in analysis.

The three models, according to Allison and Zelikow, are complementary to each other. "Model I fixes the broader context, the larger national patterns, and the shared images. Within this context, Model II illuminates the organizational routines that produce the information, options, and action. Model III focuses in greater detail on the individuals who constitute a government and the politics and procedures by which their competing perceptions and preferences are combined" (p. 392). Rather than giving different answers to the same question, each of the three models illuminates one corner of the issue and contributes to our understanding. By integrating the factors identified under each lens, the authors argue, explanations can be significantly strengthened.

The final chapter of the book in which the authors hypothetically demonstrate how the interaction of the factors identified under each lens can lead to a nuclear war should be perused by those who firmly believe that after the collapse of the Soviet Union there no longer exists the precipice of a nuclear slaughter.

Though I believe this book is a must-read for everybody (not necessary to mention all the fields), I recommend this masterpiece especially to students of strategic management who have read Strategy Safari by Mintzberg et al. (1998) for which I believe Essence of Decision will be an excellent field book and to students who have read Case Study Research by Robert Yin for which I think Essence of Decision will be a perfect workbook.

Overall, this book is a living example of a dedicated and illuminating scholarship. Highly recommended.

This is a political-sciency version of the closest we came to a nuclear war, in effect using the crisis to introduce the reader to a methodology on how people make decisions. The authors see three ways that things get decided, and when observers confuse them, dire consequences may follow. First, there is the rational-actor who does things for explicit reasons, as if there were one decisionmaker who controls everything from conception to implementation. Second, there is the political decision, often made for purposes of manipulation rather than for stated goals and hance are harder to read. Third, there is bureaucratic decison-making, according to which actors on the ground carry out orders in the way that they are trained (i.e. by standard operating procedures, or SOPs).

Basically, in my reading, they argue that these modes were mixed in the Cuban Missile Crisis - the US thinking that there was a (rational actor) policy to militarise Cuba with nuclear weapons when in fact much of the provocatively appearing construction was due to SOPs of the military who installed the missiles. Thus, the US had less to fear, but its political reality made an over-reaction inevitable.

Now, these are very useful distinctions and the analysis is interesting. However, they do not make for very interesting reading or very good history. That makes this book a slog, which limits its appeal to academics rather than the general reader. I read this for a class - otherwise, I would never have gotten through it.

Recommended on balance, but go elsewhere if you are looking for a good story rather than a rather staid acadeimic analysis.

Short, conscise, easy to read, and thought provoking. This manifesto sums up the communist credo in just a few short pages. It gave me a better understanding of where the communist philosophy orginated--necessity.

A concept born in a simpler time used as an excuse for many things from Socialism to controlled capitalism. As with any pivotal work one should read it for his/her self. There is always the chance of misinterpretation by an individual, but if you do not read this then you are just accepting someone's word anyway.
This is more than an economics book it is a way of life. It sounds good on paper but makes a lot of assumptions. Instead of worrying about workability, look at the logic that is built on assumptions of that time (written, in 1848). Add this to your library.

You can pick a side (pro or con) and make a stand if you like; but look at the size of this book and realize that many people will just use the title and build their own case. You will have read the real thing. And be sure to balance it with. "The Capitalist Manifesto" by Louis O. Kelso

The book was originally purchased for a college course in Political Science. After having read through several chapters already it has been made known very clearly what the authors opinions of the American systems of democracy. It starts with the basic concepts of describing to you the different types of democracy (popular and eltist) and how they both shaped the form of democracy we know today. Through out the entire book you are presented with information and facts on the government regarding its elitism. Not the traditional government in the sense that it doesn't describe in great detail how our government works, the different branches of government etc. The 3rd chapter presents some information, not seen in most other books, that I found relatively interesting. I won't go into to great detail on the chapter and spoil it for you, but if you're interested in learning about the darker side of Wal-Mart this books contains a whole chapter on it. Would I recommend it for just regular reading material? Probably not unless you're extremely interested in government and politics it's not set up in the story book manner. But is it a good textbook? Well that depends if you're looking for information on the government presented in a new light but with little to no description of how the government actually works, then sure. But if you're looking for the simple high school textbook seen in you're government class then this is definately not a book for you. If you take an interest in what might be considered a conspiracy theory or "the darker side" of the American government then this might be the book you're looking for. The last question to be answered would probably be is it an easy read? I would have to say ys it is because it's not the most difficult read I have ever had (textbook wise of course) but it is no where near the easiest. There's not a huge usage of difficult words and things are laid out relatively well so that the information you want or need isn't hidden somewhere within gobs of text. I hope that I have done a good job of answering any or all questions you may have of this book, if not feel free to contact me.

This text provides a unique and important introduction to American politics. Its central theme--that the anti-federalist discontent with the U.S. Constitution established conflict patterns that occur even in the present day--offers a unique way to analyse American politics. This approach easily connects students with on-going political events. E.g. Arguments today about the Iraq War are reflected in Anti-Federalist concerns about a large military establishment. The authors create a paradigm to carry out their analysis--popular democracy, which reflects fundamentally the anti-federalist view, and elite democracy for the federalist perspective. Popular democrats are more trusting of mass input while elite democrats a skeptical of the fitness of masses to govern themsleves, placing more faith in experts to filter views from the public. While the authors' bias tends in the popular democratic direction, that bias creates a balancing effect, because conventional interpretations of American conflict, whether in the media or in academe, fundamentally come from an elite democratic perspective. The authors do, however, establish the point that both perspectives are important because they form the grist of American political conflict. Examples in the book will stimulate discussion--the Wall-Mart example from Chapter 3 is always a grabber--as do the numerous cartoons sprinkled throughout the text. The charts and graphs clearly link to ideas in the text and offer numerous opportunities for "teaching moments" which allow students to develop skill at reading and interpretting displays of quantitative data. I have used this book since in came out in a first edition and find it works exceptionally well with a suplemental text (e.g. Morris Fiorina, CULTURE WAR?), which can can allow for deeper investigation of the ideas presented in the book. It's a wonderful teaching text.

This is a very good book for perhaps a 200 or 300 university level course but not at all a 100 level course. I'm using this text for PSC 101, and it's not helpful at all! For someone who is willing to spend more than average time trying to get the idea the authors are trying to send through their ridiculously poor language skills, bad topic coordination and excessively biased tone, the book can prove to be a good resource. If however, like most normal students, you want a rich and yet simple text that gets right to the point this is not the way to go.