Politics Government Books

As a novice in politics I would reccommend this product to anyone. It is written in a clear and concise manner and tells it like it is.

For all of us that are oblivious to what is happenning in this country, we need to get informed. QUICK. Cafferty tell's it like it is. A Must read for Everyone.

I know Jack as the angry man in the little box that pops occasionally during CNN's Situation Room where randomly appears and we get to see his temper flair. The book is no different. Jack is pissed off with our leadership and lets us know in 250 pages of venomous attacks. I must admit, I agree wholeheartedly with him on most (not all) of his rants and I have often thought the same angry thoughts over the past 7-8 years over "the decider's" despotic ways of running his (or our) country.

Jack explains how Bush's recklessness and poor decision stemmed from surrounding himself with his inner circle has alienation him more and more. He continues to rant how Bush's lack of leadership and post denial of not knowing the severity of what was going to hit New Orleans has embarrassed our country and allowed of loss of life and property. In this chapter he explains how one of the worst things about Bush is his inability to ever admit mistakes. The issue of immigration is brought up with a bit too much "red meat attack mode". Cafferty feels we should just throw them all out - now. He bitterly explains the illegal have now right protesting in our country (he is right). But I disagree on just throwing them all out. Who would replace them? They're very much ingrained in our economy. The complete lunacy if the Dubai port's deal pushed by Bush is brought to light. Jack only gets madder though with Bush's failed policies and wanton and Congress' do nothing attitude and the effect of national debt on our middle class. The chapter on Bush's secret successful attempts at trampling the constitution and Bill of Rights is beyond scary - it's amazing most people are not even aware of what has gone on with our rights under Bush's watch. The patriot act and the NSA's illegal acts boil is blood. On and on. A great eye opener (to those that have been closed)!

He doesn't fault the American people - after all we elected Bush - Twice. Citizens who voted for bush in 2004 IMO should have know better - the lack of intelligence, the embarrassing image, the "I answer to God" (not the people), the arrogance, the sneakiness - was all there prior to 2004. He doesn't fault the citizens for their who cares attitude and action to our current disaster that will worsen. This is the big flaw in this book - no blame is put on us - we (or the majority of us) put Bush where he is. We continue to vote these career politicians into office over and over again.

Jack is entertaining but vulgar. I appreciate though - he is a college drop out, from alcoholic parents and had a rough childhood. And the book is evidenced as being written by such. It's not verbose like Dobb's books, it not eloquent and rational like Greenwald's book. This is written by a roll-up-your-sleeve's middle class guy who is thoroughly pissed off by our government - and scared. Rightfully so.

I thought throughout the book that this boils down to a rant with no solutions. I dislike books of this nature, which carry on about the status quo and present a laundry list of complaints but no solution. It dawned on me - Cafferty did offer two solutions all through out the book - impeachment or perhaps war crime. I agree, this should have been implemented long ago. And this was the solution all along. This is a good eye opener for the citizens. I think it's fair to say, most of us feel exactly this way now.

This book somewhat reminds me of the "Idiots guide to..." series, yet nowhere does JC treat you like an idiot. The book is a clear guide to the major issues in our gov't today and points out a number of questions that we all need to ask ourselves the next time we vote. All of the major issues and scadals are discussed here (well, all except the numerous NEW problems that have arisen since the book was published) and I feel that if someone cannot see the logic and honesty of Jack's writing then I'd wager you are someone who LIKES to turn a blind eye to the corruption in Washington. Or maybe you voted for Bush. Maybe both, lol.

This book is also an easy read; if you are someone who is put off by political writing, know this book isn't dull at all and JC doesn't try to talk down to anyone or put himself on a pedestal. I hope he continues with another volume; Lord knows there is enough to write about. I'd like a thick chapter on Karl Rove, actually. I am sure there is a lot of info there.

One last thing: JC is on the money when he speaks of Congressional term limits. Let's bring that back...pronto!

Count how many of the 1 star reviews are left by people with east Asian names. Some of them admit they did not read the book. Some of them say they were offended by Jack Cafferty's "goon" comments, with respect to China's leaders.

Well, unless they are members of China's totalitarian regime, there is no reason to be offended. US leadership is full of goons too. The people who get offended are just being stupid.

I have not finished this book yet but it is one I feel everyone should read before they vote in the November elections. I want to say---------WAKE UP AMERICANS----the lobbyist and special interest groups are in control of Congress and the laws that are made. Both parties are equally at fault over the lobbyist problem and earmarks inserted in bills. The economy will always have problems when our politicians make promises and vote to enhance their own power and wealth instead of voting for what is best for the majority of citizens in this country.

'Outrage' outlines a wide range of horrible conduct by Congress, corporations, and others.

Dick Morris reveals treachery and incompetence by Congress (both Republicans and Democrats), the president, the United Nations, pharamaceutical companies, the teachers' unions, Fannie Mae, the news media, and others. In addition to pointing out the problems, he offers some solutions.

Some of the most revealing sections include the following:

Congress - The evils catalogued in this section are numerous and perpetrated by both parties. Some of the issues are corruption (selling votes for campaign contributions), automatic pay raises, inappropriate relationships (financial) with lobbyists, and more. He names names and several are very prominent including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Former House Speaker Dennis Hastert, and many more. One of the outrages is the way that leaders of both parties circled the wagons to prevent an FBI investigation of bribery by a member of 'the club' (William Jefferson, D-LA).

Illegal immigration is another outrage. Our inept federal government has no tracking of those who leave the country so there is no way to tell who has overstayed visa times. How pathetic is that! Another issue is that many visas are issued when they should not be (as in the case of 15 out of 19 of the 9/11 terrorists).

There are many more of these abuses. Some of those exposed include: student loans, tobacco companies, insurance scams, and the ACLU.

One section that is highly educational that needs to be understood by everyone is the chapter on trade protection. Morris does a superb job of schooling readers in the benefits of free trade and the damage done by protectionism.

This book should be read by every American voter.

The book makes good and valid points, however much of it is filled with statistics, graphs, and long lists not many would be willing to wade through. It is very simply written, easy to read, but unfortunately mixes fact with opinion. The annoying "action agendas" at the end of each chapter were seriously annoying just because they are all the same and involve nothing more than common sense exhortations. Really not much I did not know already in here, and I probably would not buy another Morris book, although I'll watch him on Hannity and Bill O.

I'll never forget when Morris was forced out of his pollster job in the Clinton Administration after reports of drug use and depraved sexual activity, including engaging in S&M activity with a prostitute and singing "Popeye the Sailor Man" to her on a hotel balcony in his underwear. It's good to see that he's recovered from that shameful episode. He has now entered into a highly lucrative career stringing long lists of random, unrelated issues like Obama, United Nations, John Cusak, tobacco companies, lobbyists for foreign governments, drug companies, John Kerry, Madeline Albright, etc., and creates these delightful book titles out of them and fills the pages inside with his highly informative analysis of how liberals are to blame for everything that is wrong in America. Even though he was publicly exposed as a depraved sexual deviant during his Clinton job, Morris nonetheless makes valid points about how liberals have destroyed the moral fabric of this great nation.

This book should be a must for all Americans as it reveals just how we are being ripped off, particularly by our elected representatives. No one (except Bill O'Reilly) is looking out for us.

I've always been partial to books that open ones eyes to the injustices and wrongs being committed in the world that get swept under the rug unless close attention is paid to them or any attention period. With that being said, when I ordered Mandela's autobiography it was a bit of a departure for me as a few of my books this summer have been.

The only book that touched me in the way this one did was Kite Runner. Long Walk to Freedom encapsulates Mandela's childhood, struggles as a freedom fighter, political activist, long imprisonment and ends with his election as the president of South Africa. What struck me about this autobiography is that it wasn't boring and was actually informative. About the only thing I knew about Nelson Mandela before I read this book was that he was a political activist from South Africa that was imprisoned for a very long time. I had no idea what he went through to change South Africa into what it is today. I had no idea just how much patience and just how often Mandela was tried with seemingly no light at the end of the tunnel.

I don't know that there is much to review from the book itself that hasn't already been discussed. Some have mentioned a lack of Mandela's childhood, but I didn't really think it was that necessary to put much about his childhood into the book. What really matters was the decision to become active against the apartheid of South Africa in his teenage years.

I love books like this. For me, they help me to become less ignorant of the world and what is going on in it. I'll openly admit I do have some prejudice against members of certain races sometimes for either a) myths that popular culture has created or b) just my own damn stubbornness. I had had an inkling that the history of South Africa wasn't all roses but I had never known the extend until I read this book. As a person, Nelson Mandela is absolutely one of the greatest human beings I've had the pleasure of reading about. For those of us that suffer from depression and anxiety as I do, stories like Mandela's seemingly boundless determination and willingless to rise up again and again in the face of adversity is absolutely remarkable and incredibly inspirational. How Mandela can say that prison never broke his spirit even after 27 years is just unbelievable. Granted, Mandela didn't have much of a choice all of those years but to make the best of it and to keep his spirits up. It definitely puts things in perspective for me when I complain sometimes about being bored at various events or when I negatively think about an event I'm going to before I even give it a chance to see if I like it. In a sense, Mandela's book gives you hope that we can make a difference and one person does indeed matter in the grand scheme of things.

The only mild gripe I had was within the first few pages where Mandela is describing all the tribes with names and it almost seems like made-up code names, but then again for us Westerners anything with a few more consonants in it sounds funny at times I suppose. Overall, Mandela's autobiography is a very smooth and enjoyable read. It's just fascinating learning about a man that's been an inspiration for so many and lost so much along the way to becoming who he is today.

-Travis Stein.

it is a very humourous and (I guess) honest book. He tells his tales as a child, and the innermost changes that led to leadership.
Interesting AND entertaining!
Greetings form Argentina!

I recently finished a leadership training course sponsored by my company. One of the activities that we did in the class was to reflect on great world leaders and think about what qualities made them great. It came up during the session that some years ago the teachers had led a similar exercise, but had actually asked the participants to try to communicate with a living leader who had personally affected them. The idea had been for people to get in touch with a former manager or teacher. However, it happened that one of the participants (not having a manager who he or she had admired) contacted Nelson Mandela by email. To everyone's surprise, he responded quite kindly and shared some thoughts about leaders and leadership.

When I was traveling in South Africa, I heard many similar stories. Tour groups who told about Mandela coming out of the parliament building to greet and talk to the tourists. Employees at Robben Island talked reverently about how he had taken personal interest in their lives based on the briefest of acquaintenceships. Every story emphasized his humbleness, his respect for others, and his basic approachability.

Long Walk to Freedom, for me, confirms that image of Mandela as a man who is great in part because of his humbleness, and his resistance to myth. He emphasizes his role as the man in the middle, pushed by circumstances and common decency into greatness. He consistently avoids overdone bragging (the little that is there is surely allowed him) and looks hard at the actions that the ANC took in their quest for freedom.

While it would have been interesting to read this before going to South Africa, I actually think that I got more out of it now after seeing the country first.

I really enjoyed the book. It is not a perfect narrative. It suffers in parts from being written over a period of years. There are some little repetitions and awkwardnesses along the way. None of those things matter at all in relation to either the reading experience or the importance of the book. I liked it very much, and would recommend it highly to others. Do not be daunted by its size (625 pages, in my edition). It is actually a very quick read and kept me intensely interested the whole time. Genuinely inspirational.

This book recounts the life of Nelson Mandela beginning in childhood up to the present age. It is written by Mandela himself - it's honest, straightforward style seems to be an honest attempt by Mandela to portray himself objectively, avoiding the tendency to be self-serving.

A fascinating book. It begins with Mandela in his young childhood living in a pre-industrial society of native Africans in the countryside of South Africa where white settlers have dominated industrialized society. It is an engaging society, - perhaps more advanced than our own - as one must reconsider what it means to live in harmony and in cooperation; A true democracy, based on the ideals that all are equal.

Mandela undergoes culture shock when he runs away from his traditional homeland to seek his fortunes in the big city of Johannesberg. Here is encounters white society up close, and is mortified at the inequity that exists between the native blacks, and the immigrant whites that make every attempt to dominate their country and exploit its indigenous peoples.

Mandela encounters a small group of educated, free-thinking educated blacks, and joins the African National Congress. Here he encounters several other oppressed peoples: Indians, Communists, and liberal whites. He slowly makes his life's objective to be a freedom fighter. A fighter for civil rights for all people. A life of struggle, where one must be willing to pay the ultimate price. And he nearly does.

He becomes the inspiration for downtrodden average black citizen, nearly enslaved within their own country. He willingly faces grave danger, is tried several times for his political ideals, denounced as "treason" and is eventually sent to prison "for life."

Mandela's life in prison is austere. But he and his colleagues never yield in their commitment to freedom for all South Africans. His wife, Winnie is an example of true dedication - equally a woman of integrity and worthy of the highest praise. She undergoes severe hardships being married to a "freedom fighter."

Mandela avoids the tendency to give up in the face of severe conditions, showing true mettle as he remains dedicated to the rights for all people to live free in racist South Africa. 27 years later having risked his life and surviving harsh prison conditions, he emerges a national hero.

A must read for anyone - Mandela is history in the making.

This is a fantastic book that provides great insight into one of the most inspirational leaders in modern history. His story in particular and the anti-apartheid struggles in general are fascinating and provide extremely valuable lessons. With his humbleness and incredibly lucid and organized writing style (which admittedly did surprise me), this could be the best autobiography out there. One can only imagine how different the continent would be if other African Nations had such strong leaders with Nelson Mandela's courage and integrity.

a lot of books in this genre can be dry and a total snooze to read. this book is written not only well and full of great information, but it is such an easy read. i read through chapters faster than any other "text" book i have had. i was entertained enough that it is questionable if i wasn't reading the book for pleasure instead of work. :)

This is the new edition of "Environmental Policy in the 1990s," a series now considered to be the most important in the field. This edition has some of the classic essays from earlier editions, but is expanded to cover the Clinton administration and address issues of a global nature.

I have been using this series as a basic text in graduate courses in environmental policy for years. I consider it to be a primary source of not only teaching, but research and basic information. All of the essays are clearly written and as unbiased as possible. I give this my highest recommendation.

(Addendum in 2007. This series is up to six editions with a seventh due out this summer. All are essential for the serious student of environmental policy and history).

I was so blessed to have had two evangelicals in my life (first 3 to 4 years ago a protestant one, then until very recently a Catholic one) and to get to spend hours and hours a day in professional contact with them. Both, however, seemed to want to twist my arm a bit in order to think that being conservative was really the only holy, sanctified choice. The Catholic one, beloved, even had a minion of his (keep in mind that minion originally implied protege and favor and of royal blood in a royal court) tell me that our group was "conservative". By wILLing such a thing, it was a sort of mortal blow to my belief in our relation. Just because leading political conservatives tend to be evangelicals does not mean that their politics should be considered related (at best i think it's 50/50 for the best of them being right as it is for the the best of the liberals being right, though this is not an endorse of German/Kant/Hegel/Karl Bart dialectical philosophy/theology...that's just bunk to someone like myself of a non-German, Anglo-American culture...not to a good-evil Christ/anti-christ idea...dialectical has no meaning outside the German Culture. Period.) I've never, ever for a second thought that George W. Bush's political decision could ever be considered right with God (though I must agree with my biological father's phenomenal jokes about this second president Bush is just too damn stupid to be the anti-Christ). In fact, I more than respect conservative values, actually I embrace them. But I don't disrespect liberal values (in life nor in politics), so much so that I started experimenting with them not just in my earlier spirit of tolerance but in life itself (conclusion/result: I'm not really built for liberal values...they don't really work so well for me). Such experiments have actually been fueled and enflamed by subtle, but firm pushes from these two deeply respected evangelicals towards conservative political values. (odd but true)

Anyhow, this book's message is amazing. I doubt even the pope of the Catholic Church would ever have the courage or ability to say what Gregory A Boyd is saying.

I just recently finsihed reading Gregory Boyd's book entitled, The Myth Of A Christian Nation. I was given this book as a gift from a friend who happens to be a Freewill Baptist Minister. At last there is hope! This book should be a required reading for every church member. The people in this country are so ignorant of real history and of the true tenents of Jesus' ministry. This is not one of those books that attempts to label the forefathers as die-hard Diests, although their Diestic tendencies are mentioned. Boyd does a wonderful job comparing the differences between the Kingdom of the World and the Kingdom of God. This thought-provoking work will certainly find a permanent place on my shelf!

Randall F. Hubbard
History Teacher
Springville, Alabama

A few months back I picked up a copy of Dr Greg Boyds "The Myth of a Christian Nation". The title grabbed me. A few days earlier I had a discussion with a friend who was quite in favour of New Zealand becoming a "Christian" nation, so I thought it would be helpful. The book was a very short read, and I finished it in a day. But I was quite dissapointed with his treatment of the subject. While it was always going to be a difficult subject, and I applaud Dr Boyd for his efforts, I was simply not impressed. Those who would expect a balanced and carefully exegetical view of Christianity and Politics will be dissapointed too. I found Dr Boyd to be very biased towards pacifism and prone to making large unsubstantiated claims.


For example he claimed that world missions had been ruined by the fact that Americans claimed to be "one nation under God" or a "Christian nation". While I agree that this is a harmful for missions I don't know of any missionary who goes out with that premise. My church has several church planters out from America and none of them are flying the American flag as part of their mission. None of them are out to bring political freedom to different parts of the world. In fact I've never met a missionary (and I've known a few) who ever bring up politics during missions. They are kind, friendly, accepting and they spread the gospel in deed and word. More importantly they reach the people on a level they understand. Dr Boyd made a terrible straw man of missionaries to prove his point.
Another half truth he propogated was that muslims extremists were simply responding to the evils of the crusades and bigotry of Christians. That is an extremely one sided view. While some muslims may be trying to right the wrongs of the past, they are by no means innocent of the past. Islam was a religion founded on violence and indeed many extremists get their justification from explicit commands in the Koran.

Dr Boyd also builds on these premises for future chapters to "prove" his arguement. I found myself saying "Yes and Amen" to some points he made such as "The kingdom of the world is characterised by Judgement. The Kingdom of God is characterised by amazing, even scandalous Grace." But then in the same chapter he would go on to suggest that Grace doesnt count for much unless we are working to maintain it. He stressed that God's kingdom depended largely on us remaining faithful, and in true Arminian fashion resorted to guilt tripping (Thats not to say that Dr Boyd is Arminian in his theology but many of techniques of persuasion had that ring to them).

Again building another strawman, Dr Boyd seemed to blame to the ills of Christianity on White middle class Americans. Instead of making the problem a global one in which all humanity was to blame, Dr Boyd is merciless towards white people. I found that ironic and disturbing. Firstly Dr Boyd is a white middle class American. Secondly this would not encourage any sort of unity within the body but would continue to promote division. Not all white middle class Americans behave in the manner he describes. Another half truth is that we are fed a lot of propoganda from politicians about patriotism and just wars, which is correct. However he attempts to convince us of His view with much the same teachnique.

Dr Boyd continually pointed out that the entire world was "under the sway of the evil one" and that our struggle was not against "flesh and blood". While I agree on this point he only presents half the truth, insisting that Satan was responsible for every evil that was going on in the world. There was very little treatment of an individuals sin nature and how that needs to be dealt with. For Dr Boyd it seems there is a demon on every corner. This is not a balanced view at all. Dr Boyd is also a proponent of open theism. He made statements like "God abandoned a nationalistic way of defining the kingdom of God when it didn't work with the Israelites." This is a strange interpretation of the history. As if to say God's plan A failed so he moved to plan B. Rather it was always Gods plan to fufill the law in Christ and not to abandon it. This doesnt make sense of what Jesus said "I have not come to abolish the law but to fufill it."

Towards the end of the book Dr Boyd attempts to answer some "objections" and "questions" such as "Should Christians serve in the military?" or "Should Christians serve in their countries wars?". He gave some pretty pacifistic answers with very little support apart from that "We should look to the example of Jesus." That amounts to a theology of "what would Jesus do?". The Bible is remarkably silent on some things and I don't think we're justified in holding people to our own consciences. While we are to look to the example of Jesus we are also to rely on the Holy Spirit within us and our consciences. To simply say that all Christians should not serve in the military at all or go to war is to give pat answer to a complex problem. We cannot simply give lip service to the complexity while asserting a simple answer. Of course there are no just wars, but is it better for Christians to go to jail for five years because of their objections to milatary service? Is this not a matter of conscience before God rather than a hard and fast rule?

Where I found myself most in agreement with Dr Boyd was his section that dealt with Church history. He showed clearly that whenever Christians had seized power and tried to regulate an entire nations beliefs it resulted in more bloodshed rather than unity. On this I wholeheartedly agree. We have no precedent to cite on any nation being better as a result of Christian governance. Every example is as immoral and corrupt as the next nation. But having to wade through the whole book for this small bit of truth just wasn't worth it. For those who are looking for an extensive treatment of a Christians engagement with Culture and Politics, you should look elsewhere. This book is likely to confuse less mature believers who will not be able to separate the wheat from the chaff. Overall this book does not present anything new, its all stuff I've heard before. I wonder what kind of effect this book would have had on William Wilberforce?

For almost 30 years I have believed that attaching a conservative political agenda to the Good News of Jesus Christ has been spiritual adultery.- The Church of Jesus Christ in bed with the Republican Party (a worldy philosophy)! I have believed that eventually, anyone who didn't embrace the political agenda would not be considered an authentic Christian. This has fully come to pass. I believe that there are many others across the land who have believed similarly, but have been shouted down within the Body of Christ and have either left the institutionalized church or have just sat down and shut up. Many churches have purged their congregations of those who do not accept political conservatism as part of Christianity. It has harmed the cause of Christ tremendously. Christian conservatives elected to office have supported and done some very wrong things. Greg is so articulate on these matters that I am hoping that authentic Christians across the land will begin to speak the truth of these matters in love and become the beginnings of a new movement towards vibrant, authentic Christianity alone- no political agenda attached!

Boyd's book put into words what I have been feeling in my heart but could not articulate myself to satisfaction. Since I am a person of tender heart who wants to be good, I have often struggled with the guilt trip that the Christian right tends to impose--all the shoulds and should-nots--i.e. I should vote Republican and go to world view weekend and collect literature about the voilent muslims etc. I should support President Bush and tell others to do the same and if I question anything then I am a liberal and ought to "know better" For so long I have known in my heart that something was amiss here. Deep down in my heart I knew that such things were not the defining point as to whether one was "saved" or not. Deep down I knew that there have always been "liberal" Christians and it was not a matter of "us against them." Political ideology does not define whether or not one belongs to Christ. Deep down I knew that I ultimately had to follow my own heart and the love and depth of character that my God was slowly instilling in my soul through prayer and a deeper walk. I knew in my heart that it clashed with the version of Christianity that I had grown up with and had instilled in my mind. But a wise person once told me that one can be convinced of just about anything with their mind (or by rationalizing it) but I had to be convinced in my heart if I was ever going to be at peace with my Christian walk. Now that I had been convinced in my heart, I had no way to articulate this to others who insist on being convinced with their minds--until now. Boyd does a tremendous job of articulating the heart for the sake of the mind. Now, whenever someone tries to lay a guilt trip on me, my heart can send me back to Boyd's book to convince my mind. The problem is solved. No more guilt! Thank you Dr. Boyd!

Peter Singer, inspite of his poor usage of commas, tries to make the point that economics could out do and render politics small and mostly insignificant stave for adjustments of the Golden Straight Jacket.

I think that a point on how economics and trade policies also works as a psuedo-war or carrot and stick type of negotiation fodder. Sanctions have long been used as a form of political tactic of agression or revenge but Singer fails to point this out. Rather he tries to portray everyone on the planet as being a bunch of scared sheep who are unable to control anything in this ocean of chaos that he calls Capatalism with no heart.

Also, he explains the genisis of ethics as having congieled from mammal feelings and behaviors. He then goes on to explain how those mammal traits are disctint from our closest non-human relatives. How can he compare mammals to our closest non-human relatives? It is pure nonsense! Monkeys, pigs, dogs, horses and cattle are all mammals and are our closest non-human relatives! This guy is a MORON!

Improving on that statement I will attack his stance on his "new ethic" that has spawned from our new technology and globalization. I shudder at the very idea that one, or a few, nations should impose their new found ethics onto contradictory morals, laws and ethics of smaller and less developed nations. For heavens sakes!

I think that Singer is a poor poor man who is misguided and confused. I feel sympathy for him and for his readers.
One atmosphere? What is he talking about here? Are CFC's for real?

Well I guess there is no argument, scientifically, against Chlorofluorocarbons existing or being real. Peter Singer is talking about everyone shares the Atmosphere. What I disagree with him on is his comparison he used to point the blame of pollution at America. On page 20 he said that one of Britain's nuclear plants leaked waste into the north sea and ruined shellfish and lobsters (and probably regular fish TOO) for Ireland and Norway too. Norway got nuclear waste on its shores and when it took Britain to court for it, the "author" (like he could WRITE) tries to make the point that Kiribati could likewise sure America because its pollution caused global warming which then caused the ice caps to melt which then caused the sea levels to rise which THEN caused the sea to submerge Kiribati's mud homes and farms. Wow, I think that is a textbook example of the slippery slope fallacy and makes for one terrible comparison. Britain's nuclear pollution was preventable, an accident (?) and was directly traceable to Britain whereas America is NOT the world's sole producer of pollution and there for is NOT solely responsible like Britain was.
God, I literally cannot read one page in this book without being outraged. I read this book with a pen and I do not need a bookmark for all I need to do is start reading where my comments in the margin stop.

This book is the perfect example of how deluded left wing-intellectuals have become. With friends like this (and Chomsky, and Moore, and Gore) the left doesn't need any enemies.

I recommend Why Globalization Works (Yale Nota Bene) instead. A solid overview from someone who actually understands how the world works.

This book has more of a political focus than an ethics focus. A serious shortcoming is the lack of appreciation for the Eastern perspective. There is no mention in the index of Buddha, Confucius, or Taoism. How can you consider globalization from a parochial perspective? I recommend this book by Canright: Achieve Lasting Happiness: Timeless Secrets to Transform Your Life. "Achieve Lasting Happiness" proposes Confucian philosophy as a basis for universal ethics. Globalization will crush humanity unless there is a system of universal ethics as a counter balance to greed on a world-wide scope.

While considered cutting edge at the time of publishing Singer's book "One World" simply doesn't go the distance a book should go in the dynamic world of today. Singer, basically, stops where essential liberal interests do which is a really bad thing for an ethicist to do. He doesn't get into a really nitty-gritty stuff such as seeing the consequences of leisurely, short-term benefits oriented political action as ultimately damaging for the system. By not going the distance Singer is cutting the branch on which he is sitting. Do not read.

I've read the pro's and con's of other reviews and would like to have a brief word with those considering this book as a future purchase.

Looking at the good reviews, one I could easily give becuase I find them very agreeable, one finds the essence of the book, a global utilitarian ethical viewpoint. After browsing the negative reviews I find useful criticism gone too far. There is good substance to their points, but more often they seem to be thinking aloud rather than providing a useful review.

My suggestion: If you have heard about this book or stumbled here by accident, buy this book. While there are always points of contention in the 'nitty-gritty' the essence of his thoughts are worth more than one read, and more than simple consideration. The world is a rapidly changing place and the four chapters presented in his book offer four distinct ways to view the globalization of mankind from an utilitarian ethical perspective. I admit my idealists leanings nevertheless if one doesn't agree with Singer's arguements, then there is no better place to start making counter-arguements. The book is easy to read in common vernacular and Singer gives a good overview of the backround to each chapter focus. You will be a better citizen of whichever state after reading this one.

The lessons are easy to teach & understand utilizing a spiral learning format, so the lessons are taught then practiced over and over. It challenges students to go farther than other curriculums. It uses sentence diagraming at a higher level, but easy to teach and learn. It is so easy you could basically pull out the workbook lesson and the child can teach himself.

I used "First Language Lessons for the Well-Trained Mind" for grades 1 and 2 and was thrilled that Jessie Wise came out with a book for grade 3. I wasn't, however, thrilled that I now had to purchase a second "workbook", but I did it anyway and BOY! am I glad I did. This workbook makes grammar a breeze. It is well worth the money. Trying to duplicate everything on paper would be more headache than I am prepared to put up with (I homeschool more than one child and time is treasured). The text itself is very comprehensive and challenging. We are into our second week of school and I am loving this product. I highly recommend.

This is a very well written book and just as fun as the First Language Lessons for 1st and 2nd grade. We love it!

This book is a good foundational way of introducing all the grammar lessons. It's not too labor intensive, yet it repeats enough to achieve mastery.

I am a homeschooler and have tried several grammar books and programs before purchasing this one because this level did not exist when I originally started searching for a language program for my children I'd previously used level 1 & 2 of this program.

I purchased Easy Grammar Daily Guided Review grade two and the author of that great program said to use it for grammar warmups. The search was on and I discovered that this book exists. Volume 4 is in the stage of being created now.

I give it 5 stars because it is an exceptional language arts program, it teaches the 8 parts of speech, alphabetization up to the third letter in a word, dictionary skills, letter writing and many other important skills. For a comprehensive list and overview see [...]. If you go to [...] they have a 50 page student book and a 89 page instructor's manual so you can try before you buy.

For variety I sometimes use worksheets from softbasics software and find that I will have more than enough materials to last two or more years. When I combine that program with this book I know that I am giving my children a well rounded langauage arts program that I can be proud of for years to come.

Noam Chomsky writes about the first 9/11 which took place on Tuesday September 11th 1973 in Chile when the democratically elected government of Salvador Allende was overthrown by the military forces of Augusto Pinochet. The coup had full backing of he US government and an estimated 3200 people where killed(although figures are believed to be twice as high) and over 30000 people tortured. The government of Pinochet started collaborating with other right wing dictatorships in the South american region creating an international state terrorist program called "Operation Condor". This program "killed and tortured mercilessly in the region and branched out to terrorist operations in Europe and the United States".

Pinochet was greatly honored by both Ronald Reagan and Thatcher. But worse terror was to come in both Argentina and the central American region by "the current incumbents in Washington and their immediate mentors". It was really the American fear of the independent nationalism of Chile that sparked this coup. The fear was based on the fact that Chile might become a "conttagious example", as Henry Kissinger called it, for other nations to follow. Therefore Americas obssession with Cubas successfull "defiance of the master" or even with Irans defiance with their overthrowing of the Shah in 1979. This was the real reason for the US intervention in Vietnam as well, because the country could become a "virus infecting others" (notably resource rich Indonesia). This could eventually destabalize the entire region putting the resource interests of US corporations and the British at risk . In other words, it was necessary to "justify destruction of parliamentary regimes and imposition of murderous dictatorships throughout much of the world in order to guarantee stability and control of vital resources". The virus had to be destroyed.

Public fear would have it that the domino theory would be put into effect. Ho Chi Min would conquer South East Asia, and the successfull rebellion in Nicaragua would create many similar states in central America spreading the communist scourge all over the world. Therefore it was important to sell the idea that you where fighting the Soviets, when in fact it was democracies pursuing national interests that where being crushed to ensure the safeguarding of access to resources. The Soviets have now been replaced by narco trafficers, Al-qaeda or just terrorists in general. These have all become legitimate excuses for interventions and "democracy promotion", the latest example of course being Iraq. As the pipe dream of weapons of mass destruction became apparent, the high flying ideal of democracy promotion was put forward by the Bush II administration. This would surley lead to a democratization of the whole region. The truth is that it has had quite the contraty effect, actually it has promoted the spread of terrorism in the region. This was now turned into an "idealistic war" based on Americas "messianic mission" to bring democracy to the middle east.

Britain created modern day Iraq to ensure control over its oil resources after the fall of the Ottoman Empire after world war 1. The Iraqi wealth remained in the hands of a few wealthy landowners, sheiks and of course the British. Their colonial rule and its brutally repressive society lasted up until 1958 when Abdul Karim Kasim overthrew the British colonial rulers. Both the British and the Americans reacted immediatley fearing the Qasims actions would spread like a virus among other Arab states in the region. It had to be stopped and president Eisenhower went as far as to say that Qasim was trying to "get control of the middle east oil to get the income and the power to destroy the western world". Of course this virus had to be stopped and in 1963 the CIA under the Kennedy administration organized a regime change in Iraq, in collaboration with a young Saddam Hussein and the Baath party. The CIA provided the Baath party with lists of suspected Communists and leftists and the slaughter began. National security council staffer Roger Morris writes about this time saying "The Baathists systematically murdered untold numbers of Iraqs educated elite" including "hundreds of doctors, teachers, technicians, lawyers and other professionals as well as military and political figures."

Americas actions during the Reagan administration in El Salvador during the 1980s became a model for Iraq. Here the administration saw to it that "technically credible elections" where held but that the Christian democratic candidate won. The administration "could not concieve of an El Salvador in which the military was not the dominant actor, the economic elite no longer held the national economy in its hand" ..."the US government had no real conception of democracy in El Salvador." As the "democracy promotion" commenced in El Salvador the state sponsored terror expanded within the country, all the while supported by Washington. The opposition was slaughtered in the 10s of thousands, the independent press was completley destroyed, and torture, rape and other atrocities where rampantly commited by government sanctioned death squads. In the words of the (surviving) jesuit priests of the country "alternatives that differ from those of the powerfull" didnt stand a chance.

John Negroponte is serving in the current Bush administration in charge of counterterrorism. He worked as ambassador to Honduras during the 1980s. Here he was also in charge of, at the time, the worlds largest CIA station. Negroponte "was essentially managerially in charge of the Contra war in an extraordinary way for a diplomat". Negroponte denied the atrocitiés being commited in Honduras so as to assure that the military aid kept flowing to the international terrorist operations he was running. He was closely associated with General Alvarez who was the chief of the Honduran armed forces, Negroponte praised his "dedication to democracy", the infamous Honduran batallion 3-16 was one of the most brutal and vicious groups of Latin American killers and they where on the CIA payroll.

America has overthrown many democratically elected governments and installed brutal military dictatorships in their place. Some examples include: Guatemala, Iran, Chile, Brazil and a long list of others. All in the name of "democracy promotion". But instead of promoting democracy, democracy has been subverted. Client states have instead been created, designed to serve the privledged elites and creating "favorable interests for her(Americas) private overseas investment". Communism was often used as a cover term for the threat of independant development. So infact the "virus" that has been repeatedly destroyed has been popular democracy.

Noam Chomsky describes two diagramtically opposed faces of his own country; one relating to what its government does and another relating to what his fellow citizens know. In between there is a compliant press that is not good at being impartial. The government of the USA seems to be an oligarchy that leans to the far right and less far right alternately, and the press seems to be its propaganda machine. I am not a communist, not even a socialist. I merely belive in an intrinsic dignity of humanity that needs to be more assertive. While he may not have all the answers, Noam Chomsky helps us ask more questions.

Ever since learning about Ron Paul last January, my interest in politics, especially those of the libertarian position, have increased approximately 800%. I considered myself a libertarian a good year before learning about him and his campaign but once I got into his message and delved deeper into the foreign policies of the likes of McCain, Obama, Hillary, and past figures such as Reagan and Bill Clinton, I was revolutionized and cured of any and all political apathy I had. Of course my libertarian views don't just rest on foreign policy, but it is a large part of my concern.

So though I generally do not agree with Noam Chomsky on economics and private property, I understand where he's coming from and I know he means well; I generally agree with the rest of his views, including his foreign policy views which are similar to Ron Paul inasmuch as he views the United States' arrogance with nation-building and intervention as a key problem in the world today. This is actually the first Chomsky book I have read and will not be the last. Presented almost in the manner of an extended thesis paper (quotes and citations are in the thousands in this book), it makes for a stimulated if occasionally dry read as Chomsky begins by dissecting America's interventionist "democracy promoting" policies in Iraq, Vietnam, and elsewhere as well as our supreme hypocrisy with propping up brutal regimes in places such as Indochina and elsewhere. He mentions that as conflicts such as the 1999 NATO bombing of Serbia raged, brutal dictators elsewhere were left unscathed, as our economic and resource interests lay abound with the support of many of these brutal regime. Chomsky proves in a very academic sense how few (and possibly none) of our foreign policy intrusions since Woodrow Wilson (and dating back to John Quincy Adams and Andrew Jackson) have been for much more than empire-building, resource claiming, and the removal and/or propping-up of dictators who are against our interests (in the former's case) and who will be an aid to our interests (in the latter).

Though I found Chomsky to be somewhat of a dry writer (like I said, the book assumes you have a vast knowledge of American foreign policy history past and present), he is brilliant. When I say dry I mean that it is very clinical and not written in a way that might grab the average reader, but for readers like myself with an attention span and an interest in the subject it is a blast to read. I found myself marking pages and highlighting a lot so I could go back and do further research upon completion.

In short, this is an excellent read for anyone curious about America's disastrous and insanely hypocritical and arrogant policies towards our fellow nations. Neocon republicans (and some Democrats who worship the likes of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama) will be brought to rage by its brutal honesty, but in the end will not be able to intelligently refute any of it. Highly recommended.

This is the first time I have felt compelled to write a review. Perhaps I need to read earlier books, but Failed States seems extremely biased, lacking focus, incoherent, and having a weak structure. I don't necessarily disagree with the conclusions in it, but I find the presentation of his ideas inadequate toward convincing a non-biased audience.

The book throws facts, figures, and data at you at an impressive rate, but doesn't try to build that information into a convincing whole. The authors obvious familiarity with the topics matters little when an unbiased reader is confused by his casual references and statements of fact with minimal support. Information without structure and context is very suspect. In particular, his claims of what the American people really want seemed to be casually talked about.

Even so I enjoyed reading criticism of American foreign policy. Concerning that criticism, the author doesn't offer a foil by comparing it to those Failed States that the US is being compared to. Nor, despite the authors claims to the contrary, does he really offer much advice upon specific changes. I believe he thinks changes needed are evident by what he chooses to attack. They weren't obvious to me besides "Stop doing the horrible things I am telling you about." That isn't telling anyone what they should be doing instead.

I'm a bit curious if the authors believes he is influencing open-minded people with the book. Obvious bias weakens credability. I am forced to hazard the guess that this is simply written for those who already agree with his stances.

When he stuck-to books on Transformational grammar,the Noamster was an interesting academic.[Providing insight into so-called Language Acquisition Mechanism...triggered in children in all languages by exposure to mother's "baby talk"and her function as LANGUAGE LOGOS...and a complementary READING Acquisition Mechanism(which is not-quite-as "automatic"(cf~Frank Smith UNDERSTANDING READING~A Psycholinguistic Analysis of Reading & Learning to Read)and can be(has been)driven into latency by too much of the Plug-in Drug(TV)and Digital stupor(Computer gazing & BATMAN violent/mindless video games;cf~The DUMBEST GENERATION by Professor Mark Bauerlein]...

As political commentator,however,Chomsky has consistently manifested himself as intolerant,intellectual inbred(disagree with NC at MIT seminar and you'll fail the class,or be thrown-out). His appeal is to relics of Marcuse-GrouchoMarxist/epoch who take their spoiled,privileged lives in the USA for granted like petulant brats they have" become like that which they behold & are beholden to." Chomsky's pol-raving is often unreadable dreck, popularized by Heideggerians and PM claque. If you want to read what you "think" you're reading in Chomsky,start with Czeslaw Milosz's THE CAPTIVE MIND. The United States is the most successful experiment in Res populi in world history. If you don't concede this,you need to visit a Worker's Paradise.(Second:read DARKNESS AT NOON by Koestler before you go~~it may keep you from getting shot by those you fawningly worship from safety of this wonderful nation.Or read some--now defunct--USSR history. Here's your murderous KGB/OGPU-power abusing FAILED STATE)...

This book is the first account of US foreign policy in the 1990s that treats the decade as genuine history. I mean that it does not simply offer a chronicle of the period, or a set of newspaper clippings and individual events - it offers a guiding historical interpretation that sets those years in relation to the Cold War before and 9/11 and beyond. It is very convincing that there is far more continuity today with the foreign policies of those years than many people, left or right, give credit for. It is a highly persuasive interpretation of the period and I believe will remain the standard account of its foreign policy for a long time to come.

This is a tremendously important book that explains what happened when the Berlin wall fell and America's foreign policy establishment was forced to confront a world that was no longer organized by the US/Soviet rivalry. As it becomes increasingly clear that the "war on terrorism" is only a part of the broader foreign policy needed to protect our nation in a complex and multi-polar world, this is the book to read if you want to understand how the next generation of policymakers will draw on the lessons of the recent past to set a new course. Chollet and Goldgeier know what they are talking about. They have done exhaustive research, and each of them has hands on experience in the foreign policy business. It's a bonus that the writing is lively and engaging. Don't miss this book.

An excellent read for someone who wants a non-partisan approach to history's impact on international relations and foreign policy. Additionally, Chollet and Goldgeier postulate how our current state of affairs will shape tomorrow's. This is a perfect book for someone who wants to understand where we were and where we are going.

America Between the Wars tells the story of 11/9 to 9/11 through informative, behind-the-scenes stories that illustrate the dynamic and contentious foreign policy debates from the fall of the Berlin wall to the fall of the twin towers. If you like the stories behind the history, you'll love America Between the Wars. And if you usually prefer novels, you may find Chollet and Goldgeier's narrative voice appealing. Rather than writing a wonky, boring foreign policy book as so many unfortunately do, the authors present a relevant and relatable book. Especially for those who lived through this period, America Between the Wars reveals critical elements of our past and our future.

I was in Jr. High and High School during the 90s and so wasn't very familiar with this period before reading this, and while interested and somewhat familiar with policy, am certainly no expert. After years of thinking I knew who neoconservatives were and what both parties "stood for", this book really put things into perspective and contextualized things for me. And though it's a "history", it draws extensively on interviews with leading policymakers & insiders during the period, so the text ends up reading more like a narrative (great for a novel-reader like myself).

In sum, this was really informative, interesting, and a quick read - perfect for anyone looking for a genuinely nonpartisan, nuanced look at how we got to where we are - both domestically and abroad. Definitely a must for your summer reading list.

Thanks for the book and the very quick service.

THE BOOK WAS DESCRIBED AS VERY GOOD AND SAME AS DESCRIBED BY AMAZON....EVEN THOUGH IT ARRIVED QUICKLY, PAGES WERE UNDERLINED AND HIGHLIGHTED, AND HAD FRAYED AND STAINED EDGES. THE BOOK IS ABLE TO BE USED, BUT WASN'T HAPPY WITH DIFFERENCE FROM DESCRIPTION.

This book is a comprehensive guide to professional who have an interest about the American Legal and Judicial System. Very well written is actually very easy to read. Really a very good book.