The title refers to the thrilling roller coaster the protagonist enjoyed after initial reluctance. "Mean Streak" had little of the thrills of a roller coaster and more of the plodding of a old steam engine.

The references to the wild new legal territory for the attorney were too great in number to be justified. Characters were introduced with little coloring to match their supposed epic status. Some of the courtroom passages were intriguing, but I found it hard to visualize much of the other narratives. Maybe that's my own weakness, but I think some editing could have made for a more direct, hard-hitting novel.

Carolyn Wheat tells a mean and believable story of a lawyer tangled in his own deceitful web. When mob lawyer Matt Riordan seeks the help of his ex-lover, Cass Jameson, he may be asking for more trouble than he is ready to deal with. Because Cass is street-tough and honest--an unbeatable combination in a regular courtroom, but how about in Federal Court? Cass faces a prejudiced judge (against her client BEFORE his day in court), a conniving prosecutor and an assistant who scores big on her back. How Cass solves the mystery of mob deaths and obtains justice for her client make a good read and a classic mystery. Parts of the book are slow, but hard to put down because you want all the loose ends knotted before you stop reading. If you enjoy Grisham, you will love Carolyn Wheat--she is Grisham with a bite!

Although I have read -- and enjoyed -- virtually every book in every series by the most famous female mystery writers, Carolyn Wheat unequivocally remains my favorite.

This series is about a Legal Aid attorney named Cass Jameson. As such, it introduces fascinating glimpses into seldom-seen areas of the legal system -- along with providing excellent mysteries. This is one series I buy in hardcover as soon as each book is published.

The books are all very well-written, fast-moving, and entertaining. I cannot sufficiently recommend them. IMHO, this is the best mystery series available.

i find this version too heavily edited, losing all of theemotional nuance and plot twists. with so much summary, the reading isfar too dry, and i will not offer it to children i teach. as a guide for those who want clarification so they can explain scenes to young readers, this book is ok, but again, the guts are missing. i'm quite disturbed by the weak attempt at a multi-cultural cast, as implied by the artwork (p 7). the misguided token gesture loads the story with unfortunate subtext: (stereo)typically the "african-american friend" is killed off. as mercutio, his death is a guilty burden for romeo, and incites the duel that begins romeo's demise. the only other pivotal character of hue is friar john, also african-american, who of course fails to carry the note to romeo that would have explained the plan and spared his and juliet's lives. finally, there is the archaic use of the term "man and wife" regarding r&j (in the accompanying art, he is shirtless while she is draped in cloth). check it out at the library. spend your money on a far better kids version in the Shakespeare Can Be Fun series by Lois Burdett.

"Through judicious editing, the interpolation of descriptive passages and footnoted definitions, and through the use of lushly romantic illustrations, he has found the perfect complements to Shakespeare's own words." -Resources For Historical Theatre

By judicious selection of the necessary text, he abbreviates the play without destroying it. And he does it without changing language at all.might this be the start of a new Renaissance in children's literature?" -Louise Marder, Ph.D., Editor of The Shakespeare Newsletter and C.E.O. of The Shakespeare Data Bank

Perhaps the most uncommon thing about Mr. Chestnut, the first African-American lawyer in Selma, is that he doesn't see himself as that extraordinary.

This book, which was as much about the man as it was about the civil rights movement, was a quick read that I often wished would last a lot longer.

I really enjoyed both the front-line perspective on a movement I only read about in history books, and as a law student, the legal angle was also fascinating.

This book is a very good description of local Selma people during the civil rights movement. The description of the confrontation between John Lewis and Sheriff Jim Clark is alone worth the price of the book.

But the best part of the book concerns the continuing efforts of the black people in Selma to maintain the gains of the movement, especially against white establishment efforts to take away black votes by subterfuge. The trials and tribulations of Albert Turner, who recently died, are partiularly illuminating. Everyone who is interested in the continuing stuggle to keep the movement going should read this book.

In 1921, just three years after the end of World War I, Great Britain's director of Military Intelligence made the astounding statement that General Allenby had won in Palestine because he "knew from his intelligence every disposition and movement of the enemy. Every one of his opponents' cards was known to him, and he was consequently able to play his own hand with the most perfect assurance. In those circumstances victory was certain." Sheffy's precise and far-ranging research pieces together in masterly fashion just how Allenby benefited from such extraordinary information about his foes. In the process, he shows not only how a key military campaign was fought and won, but also how the modern intelligence service took shape in a spontaneous and amorphous fashion. Along the way, Sheffy demonstrates the near-uselessness of human intelligence (spies, travelers, prisoners of war, et al.), dismissing the whole lot with a quote from the time: "What can agents find out about the intentions of Governments that have no notion what their own intentions are?" In contrast, technical means (air reconnaissance, radio interceptions) proved highly valuable. He establishes how the latter gave the British a much better idea of tactics than of grand strategy, and how they paid heavily for their wrong guesses about the latter. Despite their fair share of mistakes, the British intelligence operatives made a very credible start at bringing a "hitherto hidden dimension . . . into the forefront of modern warfare."

Middle East Quarterly, March 1999

This is a well-documented history of British intelligence in the First World War, that grew out of a PhD dissertation written by a former Israeli military intelligence officer. When the war began, British forces in Egypt had little reliable information on Turkish forces or intentions. At first, the British underestimated the ability of the Turks to attack the Suez Canal, but after a minor raid they grossly overestimated their capability. Throughout the war, British intelligence in the Mideast was hindered by both cultural bias against the Turks combined with an Anglo-Centric view that the Palestine front was a major front for the Ottoman Empire (which actually regarded the Caucusus and the Russians as the main theater of war). Several noted figures appear in the text, such as T E Lawrence (AKA "Lawrence of Arabia"), and their true roles and participation in the war are depicted without the usual colorful embellishments. Sheffy concludes that overall human intelligence (HUMINT) made little contribution to the British victory because the information provided was generally too little, too late. The one effective spy ring, the "Nili Organization" of Jews in occupied Palestine, was quickly broken up by the Turks in 1917. The only worthwhile human information came from prisoners and defectors. Sheffy claims convincingly that the most significant intelligence development brought by the war was the shift from dependence on human sources to reliance on technical means. Indeed, the British made very effective use of early imagery intelligence from aircraft and radio intercepts. By the end of the war the British had honed intelligence to the point that it could greatly contribute to the final operational campaign. Sheffy's book is well-written, if a bit dry at times, and benefits from the insights of an intelligence professional. This is a good addition to any well-rounded First World War library collection.

I really thought this book would take a pretty broad view at constitutions and other fundamental government principles throughout the world. In the end, I wound up feeling misled and a little cheated. Fact: virtually all of this book is about the U.S. Constitution alone, and specific issues in American Constitutional law and thought. There are a handful of perfunctory mentions of other countries, but only South Africa gets more than a sentence or three: to wit, the last chapter is about a South African Constitutional Court decision holding that the government should be required to build adequate and affordable housing for children. An interesting discussion -- but too little, too late.

Other topics covered in the book include: How the phenomenon of "group polarization" tends to produce extreme results in juries and other deliberating groups; Why, as a largely pragmatic issue, a constitution should not allow for unilateral secession; Sunstein's theory that the Clinton impeachment was unconstitutional; Sodomy laws in America and the impact of Bowers v. Hardwick; The notion that the Constitution, esp. with regard to the rights amendments, should be read through the lens of an "anticaste principle."

I must say, Sunstein's writing is fluid, effortless, and frequently humorous. A reader need have little to no background in law to follow the book, which is clearly aimed at the layman (citations are not even footnoted but are ENDNOTED!), but includes enough juice to give advanced readers plenty to think about. He is often persuasive, although one quibble was this: he argues, on the basis of original intent, that Clinton's misdeeds did not rise to the level of "high crimes or misdemeanors." All right, I was convinced. In Chapter 3, however, he had largely rejected original intent, or "hard originalism," as the correct method for approaching the Constitution (see esp. at 87ff). A discrepancy like this, no doubt, it largely a result of the fact that most of the chapters in the book appeared already, in some inchoate form or another over the course of ten years, as law journal articles.

But I digress. Like I have said, the book is cogent, resourceful, and generally thought-provoking. The chapters on group polarization and the anticaste principle, in particular, deserve some study and reflection. But its major flaw is a nearly exclusive emphasis on the U.S., or sometimes on very broad theories -- and a title which would lead you to expect otherwise.

First of all, I would like to say that I appreciate Cass Sunstein works a lot. Basically, I try to read everything he writes. Although here and there I would have a slightly different opinion (v.g. in free speech matters I tend to have a broader view of this fundamental right) Sunstein's books are always insightful, refreshing and profound. He has deeply influenced my view on constitutional issues.

Cass Sunstein (in the line of Stephen Holmes, another author whom I also appreciate, combines progressive liberalism with classical liberalism, showing that liberal institutions, in a proper sense, have to be strong institutions, or else they will cease to be liberal.

Another lesson we learn from Sunstein is about the value of democratic deliberation, based on reason and principle, and not in a social darwinism or "dawkinism" made of ideas such as "survival of the fittest", "natural selection", "naked preferences", "private power" or, less theoretically, "the law of the jungle". Sunstein's work is about escaping the "state of nature". It is basically against any kind of naturalistic reduction.

This emphasis allows us to build democratic institutions that prevail over the markets and control all abuses of market power (including civil and social rights violations), while still apreciating the value of private property, free enterprise and the market, as ways of strenghning autonomy, producing wealth and decentralizing power.

Sunstein also provides us critical tools to evaluate the way past injustices and patterns of subordination distort de baselines on which we build our judgements on liberty and equality, in a way that can provide a foundation of social and
legal reform while keeping important liberal principles. He is able to integrate the insights of the critical schools of legal thought, while preserving a strong liberal commitment. In this way he keeps company with authors like Rawls, Dworkin, Habermas, Scanlon, Barry, Rosenfeld, etc.,

Consciously or not, Sunstein's books, including this one, are premissed in a sense of human dignity as a intelligent, rational and moral being, that largely transcends its consideration as an purely accidental configuration of selfish genes, resulting from matter, random mutations and natural selection.

Human beings are seen as capable of intelligently designing democratic institutions based on discourse, dialogue, deliberation, reason and principle, much in the same line of the "intelligent design movement" (William Dembski, Michael Behe, Guilermo Gonzalez). Sunstein's is a "Republic of Reasons", not a "republic of selfish genes". However, Sunstein's work is not about bringuing teleology, or the good, but about the priority of right, and the belief of the creating, liberating and open ended ability of human beings to transcend past "teleologies" and give themselves more free and just institutions for the future.

Cass R. Sunstein's book is a serious piece of scholarship about very engaging legal and social issues concerning economics and law. The book derives both strengths and weaknesses from its beginnings as a series of lectures presented from 1990 to 1995. Each chapter presents a thoughtful thesis, but not all chapters link together in a clearly understandable manner. However, a reader who is prepared to put in the required effort, will gain a wealth of thought-provoking material. We at getAbstract recommend this book to anyone who misses pure intellectual challenge. Lawyers, policy makers, and economists are most likely to appreciate it.

The author provides a balance between recognizing the value that is embodied in free markets and realizing that they are not an end in themselves. Rather, the author writes that markets are best evaluated on the basis not of some imagined inherent worth, but on the basis of their practical effects in real life. By taking the focus away from the theoretical premises of free markets and allowing criticism based on their practical effects on human life, while still recognizing the amazing good they are, the author strikes a balance between those who would turn to some form of a socialistic economic system in order to achieve greater social justice and those who believe that markets can do no wrong. The author is talented at creating new perspectives from which to view issues related to markets and social justice. In addition, he does an excellent job at making a case for legitimate (yet still limited) government involvement in markets by using arguments that most conservatives would agree with. From a theological perspective, however, the author tends at times to point to markets as the source of some social ills that actually have their source not in market mechanisms, but in the presence of sin and evil in the world. Overall, the book is an excellent and balanced analysis of free markets and their effects on social justice. It is not easy bedtime reading, however. Be prepared to take quite a bit of time chewing on the author's ideas.

This book is essentially the transcript of a conference held at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas and focuses on the early period of Operation Barbarossa. This could have been an awesome book; there is a wealth of data but it is poorly presented. There are day-by-day sketch maps of each sector, but they are almost impossible to read. Original German intelligence situation maps are included and they don't make German staff officers look very good; unit symbols are not used - they actually wrote "RD" for Rifle Division on the map. This book is very useful in showing how much of a fight the Red Army really put up in the first month of the war; the Red Army of 1941 was clumsy, but not toothless. Most readers will be unaware that the first big tank battle in Russia occurred when the Soviets were able to mount a very serious armored counterattack at Dubno on the Southwestern front. However, this book missed its opportunity due to very poor editing and wandering anecdotal reminisces of German veterans (one German officer concluded that combat officers need a good knowledge of military history AND the Bible!). There are over 200 maps, but most are crude and barely legible.

The best reference available on the first 2 weeks of Barbarossa (particularly the opening week) for all three German Army groups, and then the Smolensk operation. Amazing operational and tactical detail (Corps level) with additional selected unit level descriptions. Particularly interesting are Glantz's insights into German perception of Soviet forces, and the reality, as well as Soviet tactical moves to counter the invasion. Written as a transcript of a 1980's military conference, in more of a "study" format, than strait recounting of events with Glantz acting as editor and conference participant.

I saw the other reviews of this book,and I have to wonder if the reviewers really read this abridged version of the play. This is one of our family's favorite plays, and I bought this book to allow us to do a living room performance of it in one evening. I was disappointed. First, the copy has many errors in it that make performing it confusing. For instance, in Act I, Scene 1, when Egeus brings Hermia and Demetrius and Lysander before Theseus, there is a stage direction that says "Demetrius exit and Helena follow." although Helena has not appeared (in this or any other version of the play) until later in the scene. Second, every person who has to make cuts in this play does it differently, but Cass Foster has cut some parts that I really miss, especially Bottom's playing the "tyrant" in Act I, Scene 2, and the rest of Thisby's death speech in Act V. Those scenes seem wooden and hurried without those lines. If I had known what this book was like, I would have ordered a different book with the full text and cut out lines myself. It would be easier than going through this text and correcting typos and adding lines that I feel need to be there.

March 5, 1999

Dear friends at Five Star Pub.,

We have a small school on the other side of the planet from you in a country called Azerbaijan. It's kind of a home school coop. Two years ago we performed your version of Romeo and Juliet and last year, A Midsummer Night's Dream. We really enjoy your versions because of the suggestions for staging (we're all rookies) and your notes of explanation on difficult phrases. I have to admit that the kids liked the Romeo and Juliet notes the best because there were more of them but we also like the new layout of Midsummer. It's easier to use.

Thanks for your help,

Cindi Wagner Baku, Azerbaijan

This is a complete and remarkable book about administrative law, in which the study of administrative procedure is preponderant, especially from the perspective of the cases.

Matthew Hughes offers valuable new insights on British Middle East policy-making during World War I in this study of General Allenby's campaigns in Gaza and Palestine during 1917-1918. The title, though, is slightly misleading as this book will not be of interest to military history buffs. It is, rather, a study of policy on the grand scale, an analysis of British objectives in the Middle East considered in the context of the overall war effort. Hughes argues convincingly that the Middle Eastern campaign detracted from the primary war effort being conducted on the western front. The Palestine campaign was designed first, he contends, to provide emotional uplift and counterpoint to the dreary failures being suffered in France. Second, Allenby's efforts were conceived with a view towards solidifying Britain's post-war imperial objectives-- controlling the Middle East and, by extension, vital British sea, land and air routes, to India. The book is slightly unbalanced in that, after the capture of Damascus on October 1, 1918, the focus shifts from Allenby and the men "on-the-spot", to London and Paris, where Lloyd George and Clemenceau struggled with the issue of imperial paramountcy in the Levant. Lloyd George was determined to either keep the French out of Syria altogether, or, at least, to truncate the boundaries of historic Syria in order to secure British rail, air and oil pipeline routes from northern Iraq to Palestine. Clemenceau, on the other hand, while little interested in France's overseas empire, was nevertheless determined to secure French historic economic and religious interests in Syria. Allenby had little influence on these major policy decisions. Still, Hughes is successful in showing how the 1916 Sykes-Picot agreement (wherey Britain and France essentially carved the Middle East into spheres of influence) was re-worked in the post-war settlement. His study reflects wide reading in both the secondary sources and in the private paper collections of most of the important figures in the decision-making process. This book is recommended for those interested in British Middle Eastern policy, the post-war settlement and the career of General Allenby.