When selecting a book I look for author first and then read the opening section of the first chapter. I have always found that Ruth Rendell's opening lines make me want to read more. Her characters are well crafted and you can get a sense of realism that many authors fail to achieve. This time though the book concentrates more on the feelings of Inspector Wexford and less on character & plot development. The side plots did not blend together into a seamless whole and it was hard to link the different plots together. There are times when the book is very tense but mostly it lacked the energy to keep you enthralled. I felt I wanted to get to the end of the book to see how it all fitted together but was left with a disappointing "Oh is that it?"

I read this book (or rather listened to it on audiobook) just because it was written by my newest favorite author. It wasn't exactly exciting, though. Inspector Wexford is caught in the middle of a kidnapping when his wife is one of the hostages. I was looking forward to an exciting search but was surprised when shortly into the book, his wife was released by her captors. This group was supposedly against the new bypass being built through the town, objecting to destroying trees and killing wildlife, so that's the direction Inspector Wexford takes as he tries to find the remaining 4 hostages. I'm not great at solving mysteries but even I had figured out part of the plot before the end. Rendell does tend to drag things out, making the story longer than she has to, but I can't help but like her style of writing so much that it doesn't bother me. I have read one other Inspector Wexford novel and liked it too, but have to say her suspense type novels grab my attention better. By the way, if you have a chance to listen to any of her books on Recorded Books audio, the narrator, Divina Porter, is great. She has that cool English accent and I could listen to her all day.

~ * ~ * ~ * ~ * ~
~ * ~ This wasn't my abspolute favorite Ruth Rendell, but it is still a very good Inspector Wexford mystery. It is not necessary to be familiar with Wexford and his assistant, Burden... this book may be a good introduction to the series for many.
~ * ~
This book is more interesting and suspenseful, because Wexford's own wife is kidnapped. Naturally his worries about her safety make it difficult to head up the investigation. Without giving away the plot, it's ok to say that he will need to rely on his wife as a witness, and her memory of small details becomes critical.
~ * ~ As always, the ending is surprising. Ruth Rendell is a master of plot twists and turns that keep us guessing.
~ * ~ My personal favorite of the Wexford and Burden series is " No More Dying Then", which focuses more on Mike Burden's problems after the death of his wife.
~ * ~
However "Road Rage" is definitely an enjoyable and suspenseful read, and a great sample of Inspector Wexford. I recommend it highly for mystery lovers.

This book contains no-holds barred debate among advocates of 3 answers to the question, "Is Jesus the Only Savior?" John Sanders defends the inclusivist belief that conscious belief in Jesus is not necessary for salvation while another author claims that salvation is possible after physical death. Ronald Nash defends the belief that Jesus is the only Savior, a position he defends in greater detail in his book titled "Is Jesus the Only Savior?" also available from amazon.

Three differing views of the fate of those who experience physical death without hearing the Gospel of Jesus Christ is fascinating, but limited. Again, as it seems to be, not all Christian views are presented.

Certainly, we who hold the Lutheran confession would side with Nash, who easily out of the three represented does the most exemplary job of using God's Word correctly. Nash is correct in his chastisement of his two opponents for not lack of good exegesis of the Bible. It is truly sad but commonplace to find such poor, hurried exegeis as exemplified by Sanders and Fackre.

It would have been good to have one argue: univesal grace, grace alone, the means of grace, and the mystery of why some saved and others not? This would have given the complete Biblical picture. This is not demonstrated by any of the three in this book.

However, as exemplary as Nash is with his defense of restrictivism by not only showing the proper exegesis and hermeneutic of the other two sides, he has some glaring weaknesses himself. As those of the Reformed are bent to do, they always want to let logic and reason dominate, rather than letting God's Word suffice.

Or as Luther would say, "What is not spoken of in God's Word must be left to the heavenly academy for resolution." We do not have all the answers to all mysteries in God's Word!" As Moses said so profoundly on his deathbed, "The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our sons forever." (Deut. 29:29)

Nash suffers, as Sanders catches him, on Double Predestination. Calvinists cannot say that Christ died for all, but only for the elect. This is the classic error of Calvin. As well, they hedge the truth of God's Scriptures of the Real Presence in the Sacrament. Sanders does not confess the B.C. Means of Grace as St. Paul does in 1 Cor. 10:1-11, that Christ was present with them, but most did not have faith and were disallowed into Promised Land. This typology extends throughout OT, allowing OT saints the same (Romans 4) as we NT saints, faith in Promised Messiah (Christ).

However, to deny infant sin (Age of Accountability) that Nash puts forth is unbiblical (Ps. 51:5) Furthermore, Nash is wise to attack inclusivism on premise that grace is with all until rejection of Christ and Gospel, and he shows forth Biblical attack to destory this false teaching.

Nash certainly is far and away the more faithful Biblical presenter, aside from the errors already identified. Further, he does not profess Christ's descent into hell as for what it was: Christ's victorious announcement of victory over the demon angels, nor is he correct is declaring Luke 16:19ff as being a parable. It does not necessarily have to be interpreted as parabolic, see Art Just's Commentary, Volume II, pg. 630ff.

Cudos to Nash for calling the other two's hand for not showing the Biblical evidence for their positions, while discounting his opponents Biblical proofs and offering restrictivist passages, Nash has provided the debate with the sure foundation of what God says about this controversial topic.

Contrary to Sanders and Fackre, Nash did an excellent job refuting both inclusivism and PME, and presented his case for restrictivism well. Though I don't agree totally with Nash's restrictivism (since I hold to unlimited atonement), he does a good job presenting a very persuasive case for the traditional evangelical understanding of the destinies of the unevangelized. Sanders' inclusivism leads to the heresy of works-salvation (unbelievers who positively respond to God's light and walk in His ways will be saved even without knowledge of Christ). Such heresy leads to another heresy: that Christians also must do good works to earn or maintain their salvation. His interpretation of Romans 2 on pp. 46-7 is horrible (he follows the interpretation of the "new perspective" that Paul was not opposing Jewish works-salvation but Jewish nationalism). ... Overall, a good book for those who want to be convinced of the truthfulness of restrictivism.

As an independent voter, Bob Grant makes it hard to vote Republican; a few weeks listening to the Bob Grant Show on my way home from work has certainly put me off GW for this November. While undoubtedly a clever man, the intolerance in this man's speech is sickening, amusing and bewildering all at the same time. What's worse is that his show comes under the guise of a forum of free speech, when in actuality it is entirely one-sided. For all his distaste with the mainstream media, I think if he sat back for a minute and consulted with liberals he would find an equal amount of disgust with what so many conservatives dub the "liberal media."

While I enjoy some conservative commentators, Grant is an unapologetic Republican sycophant that make him hard to stomache and difficult to take seriously.

I'd love to discuss this topic with anyone who's willing at cdgprince@netscape.net, send me a note.

Bob Grant is the voice of the silent majority. He is the greatest radio talk show host; at the height of his fame in the 80s he was the most listned to man in New York City. He was so popular, so well liked and loved by so many listeners, his opposition did everything they could do to tear him apart, mostly lobbing false charges of racism. These were back in the days when if you said ANYTHING negative about David Dinkins or Al Sharpton you were labled "hate radio". Of course we know what failures those leaders are today. Bob Grant reserved caustic language for those people he thought were tearing the country apart. This of course angered many, and today we see the rise of "compassionate conservatism". Years from now we look back at Bob Grant and his message, and when America finally collapses to the decadent, the obcense, the power hungry, those who value their dollars more liberty, we will say, Bob Grant was RIGHT. Let's be heard, indeed!

Dr. Tannen has written several books detailing the effect of gender upon conversational style. This book, specifically, offers insights specific to the work place. The author cites research to substantiate her claims, but she does not bore the reader with scientific paradigms -- she speaks in a language we all can understand. The biggest problem with the book is that it does not seem to flow. Her theories need to be better articulated through the book, and she needs to spend more time making sure that everything does not run together. If you have not read "You just don't understand," and you have a choice between the two books, pick that one. It will give the same information in a more organized way.

This book makes me acutely conscious of the way I communicate with other people, both women and men (as did "You Just Don't Understand" when I read it several years ago). Without mandating a certain method of communication or telling us how we must change our ways of talking to one another, Tannen illustrates and defines patterns and gives us enough information to work it out for ourselves. I definitely recommend this book to any woman in the workplace who wants to be seen as confident and competent without being labled as the B word.

One of the most frequent criticisms I have heard of this work from my colleagues is, "So what do I do about it?", "How do I fix it?" Interesting enough to me, most of these comments were from men. Most of my female colleagues seemed more content to understand, appreciate and work within the differences. Deborah Tannen is careful not to show a preference for one style over another, and careful to respect both speaking modes. This approach can be very frustrating to anyone looking for a "How to" business book. This book is not about solutions any more than a book comparing the French and Spanish cultures is about solutions. It is about understanding linguistic/cultural differences. Those who understand will appreciate the "other's" language. Those who do not understand will keep on misunderstanding, wondering what is wrong and looking for a book that will tell them how to fix it. I regularly recommend this book to every business woman in one of my seminars. And, I recommend that they also buy copies for (a) their boss and (b) all of their subordinates . . . particularly if they are men.

First, it would be nice to explain, that this book is targeted to (a) women, (b) women suffering from the lack fo self-confidence, (c) women suffering from the lack of self-confidence and comfortable with blaming men for sexism on a working place. It's just too much time spent on sexes relations instead of real communications problems. Of course, difference of male and female styles of communication is a problem, you have to keep in mind, but this is not the ONLY problem. Reading the review on a boook I expected advice on improving my communication skills, not to hear a bunch of regular feministic stream of accusations of the business world. It's just misleading, useless and very unpleasant. So if you want feminist propaganda, this book is for you, if you really want improve your skills, go somewhere else.

I feel that this book was very informational and useful with many instances in my life. It really gave me an insight to the reasons why people act how they do, and it made me comprehend my boyfriend and friends more. I have misunderstood them many times, and after reading parts of this book, I have realized what went wrong.

Deborah Tannen has effectively shown the differences between the communication styles of men and women. Although it doesn't tell either sex how to better their communication styles to close the gap, the book uses many examples of situations that people have encountered and can relate to which will help them better understand things that have happened in their life. It answers a lot of questions for a lot of people. This book is fairly easy reading, but you have to be mature to understand what is being said. If anyone is having problems with the opposite sex, then I strongly recommend this book.

This is a useful, interesting, provocative description of differences between men's and women's speech behaviors. Tannen takes an essentially socio-cultural stance in explaining the reasons for these differences. Not only does she present coherently her ideas, her speech is crisp and animated; thus, it is a delight to listen to her. This audio is an excellent introduction to Tannen's work on this subject. I ask students enrolled in my Gender and Communication course to listen to this edited tape in lieu of purchasing the book, as this proves to be an efficient alternative to reading the entire book. For instructors similarly inclined, I recommend purchasing two or three copies to be placed on reserve in the university library.

but what can a 14 year old boy do other than regurgitate what he's heard from rush limbaugh, his parents, and the other conservative sources that his mom and dad expose him to every day.

Can you take seriously the opinions of someone who's never owned a home, worried about paying his rent/mortgage, dated, been married, raised children, lived on his own and established his independence?

I will not cut Kyle Williams any slack because he's young. This book is simply a collection of "other people's opinions."

And more importantly, can a 14 year old really be happy spending is youth dwelling on politics, abortion, homosexuality, and myriad other meaningless subjects that americans distract themselves with? ...

I went into this book hoping to be impressed with a 13 year old writer and came out with even less hope for the youth of America. This Home schooled rightwing [author] spends his time over analyzing irrelevant points. You COULD read this book, but your time would be better spent searing your corneas with a cigar.

Kyle Williams has been regarded as prodigy of some sort. You could consider him Rush Limbaugh's "mini-me." His writing is nothing more than a novelty act. Like a trained monkee, he goes through the pundit motions: bashing gays, social programs, etc..
His approach is comparable to other "Shock Jock" personalities like Michael Savage and Joe Scarborough. He makes dramatic statements and offers very little factual information to emphasize his point. His lack of "real life" experience is evident in his lack of tolerance for diversity and culture. This book is nothing more than the diatribe of a young child with an exceptional ability to rehash the kind of rhetoric prevalent in the talk radio scene. What a joke!!!!!

I bought all four of the books in this series. I found that the contacts are all mixed up? For instance, in the "Press" section, there are Production Companies, Entertainment Companies, Studios etc. listed. I was hoping for the money I paid that it would be a bit more organized. Also, a lot of the data is out of date.

Very complete information. Extremely helpful. Let's of sources and contact information. Definite must buy!

This book proposes that some groups of early Dutch sailors and passengers, marooned in Western Australia, had considerable influence on some of the Aboriginal cultures of the central west coast of WA. A fairly high proportion of the evidence offered is linguistic, and it is this which I am best equipped to assess. The author is a WA identity and amateur scholar who has achieved popular publication on linguistic and other issues. In this case his linguistic material has been informed by extensive reading in the discipline, and - although his wish to demonstrate his case is obvious - he has apparently made an honest effort to deal with the technicalities. But his treatment nevertheless displays various misconceptions, and in some respects it appears simply naive. These include: popular but long outdated comparative linguistic methodology, use of minority/near-fringe/outdated theories, very loose/inaccurate treatment of phonetics/phonology and spelling, implausible proposals on specific cases, some quite large factual errors, etc. (If some of these features are in fact deliberate, with a view to an intended popular readership, this should be made clear.) The upshot of these shortcomings is that Gerritsen certainly overstates his case. The Aboriginal languages in question do seem to have some unusual features; but in most instances the case that these involve Dutch influence is not strong. There must also be concerns in respect of the degree of cultural and linguistic influence which such groups might be expected to have in such a situation. (But that is not to deny that Dutch and Dutch-speakers might have had SOME influence in the area.)

The teaching provided by Mr. Echols is fine. However, the most important thing I can say about the book for prospective buyers concerns its organization, or more accurately the lack thereof. Most prospective buyers will probably be students looking for commentaries on Revelation. This is definately NOT in that category. Mr. Echols takes several topics contained in Revelation and explains/comments on them. And the topics that he selects jump back and forth throughout the book of Revelation. Very hard to follow and therefore, more difficult to use than most. Hope this helps. God bless. Mike

This new title by Roger Day, 'The Life of Sir John Moore' provides the reader with an interesting view of a man who the author categorizes as "the classic tragic British hero". This is the first biography I have read of Sir John Moore although I have come across him in many previous books. The author's view of Sir John Moore differs from many other accounts, the most recent being in 'The Peninsular War' by Charles Esdaile.

Regardless of these differences I found that the author's biography of Sir John Moore was well presented and a delight to read. His campaigns were covered in enough detail to allow the reader to form an opinion on the man and his achievements. The narrative runs to only 220 pages so it could not be considered an exhaustive study but more of a general overview of the man and his times. According to the publishers much of the primary research material has previously not been utilized.

Upon finishing the book I felt that Sir John Moore was a brave man who actually felt some responsibility towards his troops welfare and did all in his power as a leader to ensure that they were well looked after and used in an intelligent manner. At times it appeared that these concerns and his forward thinking, taking in the 'bigger picture', did not sit well with both his superiors and politicians in London nor with some of his subordinates.

Once again I was amazed and disgusted to read of the political backstabbing and cover-ups conducted by some of the politicians at the time. This appears to be a constant thread throughout history, the soldiers doing the dirty work while the politicians find some way of appearing to be squeaky clean when things go wrong. Overall this is an enjoyable book and should find acceptance with those who have read little on the subject, a good primer for further reading.