I am one of those people that has to finish a book once I begin, whether it's great or terrible. I wished I wasn't after the first page of President Carter's memoirs.

My opinion of Jimmy Carter as a President aside, this book is an exhaustively boring collection of boring anecdotes, embarassing international incidents, and cowardly Presidential acts and statements. I'm too young to remember the Carter Presidency in any detail, but I can only imagine how truly miserable a time that must have been for our nation with the author of these memoirs at the helm.

I've read many Presidential memoirs and autobiographies, particularly those of the last half century. Interestingly enough, I'd skipped right over Carter's, jumping from Ford to Reagan without much concern. The historical void that doing so created left me feeling better off than having now read "Keeping Faith." No other work authored by a president or past president has left me feeling more insecure at the thought of that man having been the most powerful in the world for a time.

Jimmy Carter is like Herbert Hoover in more ways than one. Hoover's memoirs are among the most lucid and insightful that any president has ever written. So are Carter's. Hoover was one of the most intelligent presidents we've ever had. So was Carter. Hoover translated Christian charity into concrete action all his life. So has Carter. But Hoover's presidency was one of the century's worst. Regrettably, so was Carter's.

The Camp David Accords and the Panama Canal Treaties were his only notable successes. These were grievously outweighed by his failures -- double-digit inflation, double-digit interest rates, the ill-considered "crisis of confidence" speech, the fall of Nicaragua to the Sandinistas, and the fall of Iran to medievalist radicals. On this last point, Carter's refusal to let the Shah come to the US to die was motivated by a desire not to offend the Islamic militants who hated him. (Don't take my word for it; read Carter's own explanation in "Keeping Faith.") For all Carter's moral courage, this episode is one of the most despicable examples of moral cowardice in the history of the presidency.

The message of American weakness was not lost on the rest of the world. Our allies in Europe, doubting America's commitment to them, proposed to base intermediate-range nuclear missiles on their own territory, which led to so much danger in ensuing years. The Soviets invaded Afghanistan. And the Iranians seized the US embassy and held the hostages for 444 days. That they were released at the very moment of Reagan's inauguration was no coincidence.

Carter's book is not very candid. It lays much heavier emphasis on the few successes than on the areas of weakness and failure, and has a flavor of rationalization and self-justification. And his discussion of his meetings with Reagan during the transition after the election of 1980 is bitter and petty.

If he could rewrite his memoirs today, I suspect Carter would do it differently. His life since then has been so exemplary that he no longer needs to worry about history's judgment of his failed presidency. For that judgment will be eclipsed by history's judgment of him as a man.

Growing up in the 1990s, I was never familiar with President Carter or his specific policies. This book gives a very thorough and honest review of the major policy issues confronting President Carter in the late 1970s. If you think his presidency was a failure, you should at least take time to read about why he acted the way he did. He explains the seemingly endless energy debate in great detail and also what led him to give his infamous "crisis of confidence" speech. He gives a practically minute-by-minute account of the hostage crisis and how he worked (successfully) to win their release without nuclear weaponry or massive bloodshed. His coverage of the 1980 election was somewhat superficial so I suggest those interested in that election look elsewhere. If you are a die-hard Republican intent on bashing President Carter, this book is not for you, but if you are sincerely interested in knowing more about the Carter administration, then by all means buy it. Carter does try to justify his actions, but what presidential memoir doesn't? This is a great book that some of the other reviewers seem not to have read.

Once over lunch with a Polish-American friend of mine, we discussed affirmative action. I support it; she doesn't. "Carolyn," she said, "you're so smart. Aren't you resentful that people will think that you got so far in school, employment, and life in general because of the color of your skin?"

"Kim," I answered, "what makes you think that black people don't think that everytime we see unqualified white people who've "made it"? Do you really think George W. Bush would have been admitted to Yale if he'd been black?" That gave her some food for thought so I was able to finish my share of the sushi before we moved on to dissect "Memento". I loved it; she hated it.

The point is, the argument that affirmative action is somehow unfair to blacks because it lumps the "unqualified" in with the "qualified" is bull. Life lumps the "unqualified" in with the "qualified" all the time. Which is why both a D student cheerleader like George W. Bush and and an A+ student bi-lingual Academy Award winner like Jodie Foster hold degrees from Yale.

Why is it that all of the black intellectuals who come out against affirmative action owe their educations and careers to its existence? It's amazing how these men and women want to turn around and lock the doors that openly admitted them so that no more minorities can pass through.

Stephen L. Carter's argument is flawed. But I'm sure it helped sell his book, so more power to ya, brotha! Count your cash and forget the cost to minorities in America.

This is not the book that many will expect it to be. If the reader is looking for a book taking a position for or against affirmative action, she will be dissapointed here. In fact, half of the book actually is absent talk of affirmative action at all. What Carter does do in "Reflections.." is relay to us his experiences, thoughts and feelings on the matter in the style of an internal socratic dialogue.

Stephen Carter is just the man to do it. He has written many books on the many aspects of law and, as he conveys in this cultural memoir, has aquired views notoriously hard to pin down (how many 'liberals' do YOU know who wrote books suggesting that church/state seperation has been taken too far?!) Accordingly, he can admits both being helped by affirmative action and being psychologically hurt by some of it's misguided effects. His willingness to think and write about these quandaries, so often neglected by other thinkers, makes this a fascinating read. No dogmatic diatribes or easy answers, just discussion that is passionate yet objective.

While affirmative action dominates the first half of the book, it is used as a springboard to the second half, which discusses a deeper problem- that of a noticeable distrust in Black America of dissenting political voices. Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele, Clarence Thomas and the like are quick to be called 'white' or 'inauthentic' if they voice opinions contrary to mainstream black thought. Whether or not you agree with Carter's observation, his discussion here is lively, thoughtful and always respectful of all angles.

So, to close, the reason for the subtracted star is the fact that this book might disappoint two expectations readers may have for it- First, there are no conclusions reached here. While this is a good thing in itself, the reader looking for winning intellectual argument will need to look elsewhere. The second is that the title is a bit misleading as only about 100 pages are actually on affirmative action. Again, the discussion after is just as mind-capturing. Still, because of the title and synopsis, it is a bit misleading.

I picked up this one in a second-hand bookstore in Quetzaltenango, Guatemala. What an odd place for such a book, and what a treat it was for me!!

I have many friends from the US, and I have over the years heard they mentioning of "AA-programs". Some of my friends are positive to the AA-programs while others are against them. I must confess that I have absolutely no first-hand experience on this topic at all. I have the "preferred" skin-color, and also I'm living in Norway - which is one of the more advanced countries when it comes to equal opportunities - equal pay etc. Therefore, in the past, I had little to contribute with when the topic was discussed. And lack of knowledge was probably my strongest motive for reading "Reflections of an Affirmative Action Baby".

One would think that a serious topic as Affirmative Action really is, would make a dry and rather verbose book. But Dr. Carter has an easy writing style, combined with his personal anecdotes - "Reflections of an Affirmative Action Baby" was an entertaining read! I greatly enjoyed the book from page one. It was too good to put down, so I finished it in a few long sittings.

After reading this book, I have a better understanding on how the different AA-program works. And I must admit that I side with the ones of my friends whom are against such programs. This, simply because I truly believe that "color-blind is best". Treat everyone as individuals, and stop the stereotyping, and the building up under the belief that minorities cannot compete in a level playing field. For example, when American universities admit Blacks, Hispanics or others with lower exam scores than the rest, it is a waste of resources. They are more likely to follow the trend with lower test results than the rest, to not pass the exams, or fail to graduate at all (Thomas Sowell "Race and Culture - A world view", 1995). If any minority group be it Blacks, Hispanics or others, score lower than other groups, the recourses should be put in to improving the schools rather than telling them (the minorities) they do not need to meet the same standards as others. I can of course never completely comprehend or understand the terrible injustice and the endless frustrations that the minorities must have suffered, as I believe you have to have "walked in their shoes" to do so. But I am at least much more knowledgeable when discussing the topic.

After reading the book I passed it on to my friend, Rosa. She is living in US, but her parents moved from Puerto Rico to US some 30 years ago. She too, finished the book in a sitting or two, and she passed it on to her mother who was visiting from US. Both Rosa and her mother could perfectly well identify with Dr. Carter's book. I can never imagine what it is like to feel the doubt of colleagues to whether my success was achieved because of my race (and thereof by the privileges granted under an AA-program) rather than merit. But according to what Rosa told me, that is something all minorities has to live with. I am sure she knows what she is talking about, being a highly successful woman teaching (and doing her Ph.D.) at one of the best universities in Chicago. Another (black) friend of mine (also very successful) says "..My SAT-score was way above the score required, and I would have been admitted to the West Point Academy even if I was polka-dotted. But I am so used to the accusations of me achieving what I have achieved due to my skin-color rather than to my merits, to the point where that I am not even offended by it anymore..."

"Reflections of an Affirmative Action Baby" is a book that taught me many things, and it should be required reading for everyone.

It is a book that leaves you thinking - which is not necessarily a bad thing...

I used this book, which came highly recommended, to teach a graduate-level course in Family Therapy. At first glance it seemed like a useful text, having earned a great deal of praise from other professors. However, the book was a disappointment to both myself and my students.

While I would not go so far as to say that the book contained no useful information, much of the book's potential utility was overshadowed by the authors' transparent political agenda. An example of good clinical advice provided by the authors was to ask wealthy families, in an initial interview, how they are using their funds to help the poor. Coming across with this overtly judgmental and clinically irrelevant question in the first interview is clearly not the way to win over a troubled family.

When studying the book, it was often possible to forget that families seeking therapy may actually have troubles of their own. The articles in the book focused largely on sociopolitical issues. Obviously, one cannot discount the influence of the larger context; however, struggles with gender unfairness in the workplace are rarely the presenting problem which drives an entire family into a therapist's office. Perhaps it was for this reason that focused, practical clinical advice for the budding clinician was nearly absent from many of the articles.

Pragmatics aside, the book was also lacking in terms of scholarship. A variety of grand claims were made by various authors with limited citations to support these claims. Despite the reference lists at the end of each chapter, I found it jarring to read several consecutive paragraphs without footnotes describing, for example, the "typical" presentation of clients from different cultural groups. There was also a surprising tendency on the part of some authors to make detailed references to their personal lives in the article. While anecdotes can certainly be illustrative, they should not serve as the basis of an article.

Overall, I was very disappointed in this book and would not assign it again. While there was some useful information embedded in a few of the articles, on the whole this book attests to the need to keep textbooks agenda-free.

I think this may be the best book I've read on the family life cycle events we are told to anticipate (marriage, motherhood, launching of children, aging) as well as the unexpected difficulties life plunks down in our path. It is so clearly written that I recommend it not only to family therapists, but also to just plain folks who want to learn more about how families work. It's rich, comprehensive, pioneering, bold,inclusive and very helpful.

As a psychology intern who has worked with families for teh last year, I have found this book to be extremely helpful in understanding the families that I work with. It has helped me keep their life cycles in perspective, and has allowed me to understand the not-so-conventional families. We used this book in class, and I have been surprised at the amount of times I have turned to it since. In my quest to do the best job possible, I have read many other books on family therapy. This book was extremely valuable and helpful to me, and offers realistic content that is not found in most other books.

Unfortunately, This book is not your well known X-Files Guide book that we've all grown to Love. If you love Art, and meaning Freaky Art, then this is your book to own. But on a lighter note there are Scully, and Mulder pics. for your enjoyment. Fortunately for myself, I Love unique art, and X-Files is definitely covered under that category. I found it interesting to go into the minds of these very talented artists; to immerse myself into their subconsciously Talented works; In a way looking through their eyes at how they view The X-Files ((who knows, maybe even their own lives)). There are notes for each picture, and descriptions of what inspired the artist to Paint, draw, snap pollaroids or mold out of clay their creation. So if you're into Very Unique, yet captivating Art, then this is a Keeper. "Hope Ya Likes!"

This book, so to call it, was very interesting. It showed creativity, and a darker side of the x-files as represented by the viewer. If you like art, this is a must buy, if not, I wouldn't recomend it.

This is an awesome book for real X-Files fans because it shows a little of the truth behind the show. What I mean is, while there's some aspects of horror to it and a lot of surreal stuff, it also pokes fun at itself and the stars in a genuine way that makes you feel like the people behind the scenes are willing to let you explore things from their perspective a little. The pictures are thought-provoking each in their own way and you can pick up on things you didn't see before each time you go through them. It's a very nice book and would make a nice gift for any fan.

This book is rather poorly written; the plot devices introducing the characters to the uninitiated are rather transparent and add nothing to the story, the plot itself (the allegedly main plot involving conflict with a hostile alien race) is trite and artificial, the scene-shifts are choppy and amateurish, and the characterizations are rather two-dimensional for the most part (the exceptions being McCoy and Dr. Dyson, the romantic interest). The only thing that saved it from a one-star rating is that the subplot of McCoy losing his memory (as near as I can tell, the REAL main plot) is moderately intriguing in concept, and handled surprisingly well other than the fact that the cause of the amnesia is trite beyond words (the old bonk on the head trick) and the cure for it so heavily foreshadowed that by the time we finally get to it, it's seriously anticlimactic. This is not the worst Star Trek novel I've read; it's better (by far) than "Triangle" or "Spock Must Die", and a bit better than "Killing Time" or "Black Fire". But overall, I'd have to say that it's in the bottom 10% of all the Star Trek novels I've read.

This is one of the better classic Trek novels from a period where it was extremely hit or miss. What I liked most about the work and think that Carter worked out very well is McCoy's emotions at being a young man, trapped in an old body in his future. Definietly a must have if you are a collector of the series of books and a great read for the more casual buyer.

WOW! This is a very exciting book! It uses the classic early Star Trek world with a little mystery! Dr. McCoy loses 25 years of memories when his head his the floor. Now an unknow alien race attacked a merchant ship, a Klingon Warbird and is heading for a station. Kirk must defeat them without his trusted Chief Medical officer. But McCoy does remember an old pilot who spoke of these aliens...

...the Ravens.

I thought the book was a bunch of bolagna. I didnt care for it at all and someone should burn it. The only reason i liked it was because it had a bunch of short stories and not just one big book with a bunch of chapters. It had a lot of truth in it which is the only good part of the book. The book was basically about kids that dont fit in and are outsiders. Who ever get's this bpok should throw it away or tearit and burn it into peices.

The book deserved 2 stars because it was a terrible book. I really didn't care for it. it is basically a bunch of short stories about people on how they don't fit in. Alot of it was untrue because people only act bad when they are not liked by others. I also think it deserved 2 stars because it had a bunhc of short stories and there is no boring parts in it. If it would of been a long book i dont think to many peple would be interested in it. Over all i think if somone get's the book they should through it away.

"On the Fringe" is a book of short stories compiled by different authors. The stories do contain one central topic, youth that are considered outsiders. These outsiders face many different problems. One story focuses on hygiene problems, one is about a boy that is short, thin, and is nervous around his peers, and yet another is about an outcast who took his aggression out with a gun at school. These stories did not all focus on one person; several had a cluster of individuals that were ins ome way or another ostricized by the seemingly perfect in-crowd.
We all read this book with deep interest. We felt that it was easy to read due to the fact that they were short stories. We had a desire to find out what happened in each one. We felt like it was very informative. The stories definitely opened our eyes to a variety of issues that neither one of us had ever imagined existed. We, as a society, tend to close our eyes to so much that is unpleasant. This book brings out that side, the one that no one wants to realize exists.
As for liking this book and recommending it, we thought that it was very enlightening and educational, but we would not recommend it for school-aged children to read. It touches on many topics that do happen in our schools, and we do not think that children should be given examples of how to humiliate other students. This is a book that we would recommend to adults. This book illustrates what is going in the heads of kids that do not fit the perfect student role model. These are everyday young adults with problems. This collaboration of stories opened our eyes, and hopefully helped us to know who we, as future teachers, are looking for that need extra love and attention. Maybe with our eyes open, we will be able to counteract some of the negativity that these future adults undergo and keep them from performing a drastic event that will seal their fate forever.

As an avid sports and basketball book reader, I'm glad to say that truly great sports books (ie. A Season on the Brink by John Feinstein or David Halberstam's Michael Jordan and the World He Made) actually exist. Sadly though, Chris Young's effort at documenting Vince Carter and the Toronto Raptors' history does not even come close. In fact, in terms of both content and interest sustainability, it pales in comparison even next to Shaquille O'Neal's lighthearted autobiography, "Shaq Talks Back." Young is certainly a decent newspaper journalist, however, the book offers little beyond typical newspaper sports journalism. Essentially, what you get is a montage of newspaper articles about the history of the Raptors and not very much about Vince Carter. His life story, significant relationships with other people, and important events are all neglected and instead we get page after page of description of Carter's otherworldly leaping ability. Thanks Chris, but we could get that by watching TV. Also, the identity dilemma that appears to be the thrust of Young's portrayal of Carter, that of being a star athlete while trying to be a nice guy at the same time is imminently laughable.

The only sort of groundbreaking news this book offers Vince Carter and Raptors fans (who by definition, already know everything else Young tries to present) is its occasional naming of certain NBA players who have had a history of smoking marijuana. I'm glad to see Young at least put something in the book he doesn't write in the newspaper.

This book is a good book, but don't buy it if your just a fan of Vince Carter. It's more about the franchise of the Raptors and the business of sports and the NBA. Chapter 5 is the best chapter in any book I've ever read, if you interested in the business side of sports and advertising. So to a sports fan this is a very interesting book, but to someone thats only in it to find out about Vince Carter, it's not a good choice.

This is a very good book showing what the world of the NBA, Vince Carter lives in. It goes a little into the problems of Butch Carter, the Raptors organization , and Tracy Mcgrady's rise to stardom. Mostly it involves what Vince Carter, a rising superstar, has done to get where he is in the NBA. Overall it shows the side of the NBA you don't normally see. It' a very interesting book. I enjoyed this book very much and I think you will too.

Carter's first Trek novel, Dreams of the Raven, was an outstanding effort. The Children of Hamlin, however, doesn't rise above the level of an average Trek book - a pleasant diversion, but nothing more. Like so many Next Gen episodes, Children of Hamlin is saddled with both an inane subplot (involving the ever-popular technology-impaired wandering farmers; fortunately, these don't talk with Irish accents!)and too much Wesley. Its main story, though, about efforts to reclaim children abducted by aliens fifty years before, raises interesting philosophical, moral, and ethical issues that are only given lip service by Picard and the crew. But, then, if you're looking for insights into philosphical, moral, and ethical issues you're not likely to be reading a Star Trek book, are you?

"The Children of Hamlin" is but the first of only three great Star Trek The Next Generation novels that this fine author brought to fruition. While not being her best STNG novel, which in my opinion is "The Devil's Heart, it is a well written and thought provoking early Star Trek The Next Generation story. What is amazing is that it took the author two years to write her previous Star Trek The Original Series novel, "Dreams of the Raven," but after being given only three months for this novel, she wrote it so well!

The premise:

Everybody in Starfleet and the Federation knows the tale of the small Federation colony of Hamlin where aliens called the Choraii came and destroyed the colony, killed all of the adults and abducted the children and disappeared into the blackness of space. It is now fifty years later and the Choraii have returned, but this time they will have to deal with the USS Enterprise NCC-1701-D, her stalwart commanding officer, Captain Jean Luc Picard and her crew.

I would definitely recommend this early Star Trek The Next Generation novel for it's author is among one of the best of the early trek authors and it is a well written, thought provoking tale, raising the question of children who were kidnapped and later, as adults, are given the opportunity to return to their own kind but wish to stay where they are. {ssintrepid}

This story is good for the interesting ideas it addresses in a science-fiction format, not as an action-adventure story. Ideas such as: if someone is the victim of a kidnapping, and has remained in the custody of their kidnappers for many years before an opportunity comes to free them, is it more appropriate to free them or not to free them if they have been brainwashed by their captors to the point where they do not desire freedom, and wish to remain where they are? Clearly, they are incapable of making an informed decision, but then, isn't freeing them against their will rather a contradiction in terms? Fascinating concept, and one that never is definitively answered in this story, for the obvious reason that there is no definitive answer. Still, it is addressed evenhandedly and in a very interesting manner. Further, the characters are handled well, the established characters ring true and the new characters are interesting (if in some cases not very pleasant). All in all, a well-written story, and worth reading.

I used this book for a introductory course to graduate students that had no programming experience. This book was not set up for introductory students. You really need to have expericence with programming languages, especially C and Pascal to make heads or tails of this book.
I didn't like the layout...spending the first part of the book telling you what it is going to talk about, and then spending the second part retelling you. In some cases, in exactly the same words....the organization needs some work and the index and glossary were not thorough enough to be of help. I ended up buying two other books on programming languages to help explain this one to me so I could finish the course.
The review questions did nothing to prepare you for the problem sets at the end of each chapter and the problem sets didn't really have examples in the text that you could refer back to. Like I said, it seemed that the book expected you to know more than introductory level.

I am using this book for a programming languages course and find it only slightly useful. It places rather too much emphasis on high-level explanations and history of programming languages, and may be of limited use to people who want to get a deeper understanding of the mechanics of designing a language/compiler. The book is clearly sectioned but each section seems to ramble on without a clear focus of where the discussion will lead. Some exercises, especially the ones on evolution of programming languages, seem contrived. There is also a conspicuous absence of regular expressions/automata which is also important to understanding programming languages

I used this in school for my PLs class and it was great. The breadth in the content is excellent and the historical points that are made provide a context to understand why exactly certain languages have evolved the way they have today. Great reference even today at my job.

I don't mean to be mean, but this book gave me no new information about ADD. It is the same info from everything else that I have read.

Those of you who have read other books by Barkley have already read this one. It is the same thing over and over and over again. Don't waste your money.

My main reason for writing is to point out that the earlier reviewer who criticized Barkley for the passage about the 3 Little Pigs completely misunderstood the point Barkley was trying to make. Barkley was not saying that he thought that ADHD people deserved what they got; he was saying that some people who misunderstood what ADHD was all about might believe that ADHD people deserved what they got. The reviewer did not read Barkley carefully.