After reading the other three works from the Oxford Series, I was expecting something similar (well-wriiten and readable history). Unfortunately, this book falls short for the following reasons:
1) Boring (and I really like reading history, this says something)
2) The writing style makes it difficult to follow events (one becomes even more confused about the Revolution from reading this book)
3) overanalysis on events (4 chapters just on the Stamp Act is a bit much)
The American Revolution is a great story, filled with interesting events and characters. Why doesn't Middlekauff include more of these? His book is more focused on trivial details and overanalysis which lessen the "big picture". Anyone looking for a good and readable book on the revolution should aviod this one!

The inaugural volume of the highly honored but still unfinished "Oxford History Of The United States" series is "The Glorious Cause: The American Revolution, 1763-1789," a superbly written, scholarly, and highly literate account of the America's War for Independence. Written by Robert L. Middlekauff, Professor of History... this is the finest account of the Revolutionary War I've found to date... even better than Benson Bobrick's "Angel in the Whirlwind," which I've already reviewed.

"The Glorious Cause" is a comprehensive account of the American Revolution designed to give readers a well rounded overview of not only the causes of the war, but also of how the war was fought. The book succeeds admirably at its task. After finishing "The Glorious Cause," I felt a much greater appreciation for the men and women whose struggle for freedom brought forth on the North American continent a new and independent nation - the United States of America.

"The Glorious Cause" begins by examining the causes of the American Revolution. In one of the book's earliest chapters, entitled "The Children of the Twice Born," Middlekauff carefully lays out his closely reasoned and well argued thesis: that the seeds of revolution were planted long before the war was actually fought. Those seeds, embodied in the economic, social, political, and religious fabric of American society, made the evolution to democracy on the North American continent almost inevitable.

The earliest settlers came to the New World because of their disenchantment with authoritarian English laws and what they viewed as centralized, overly ritualistic, dogmatic Anglican religion. When the settlers arrived with their ideals of political and congregationalist religious democracy, they found land cheap and plentiful. Whereas only about 20 percent of all Englishmen were landowners, and hence were eligible to participate in England's parliamentary democracy, over 50 percent of American colonists owned land and therefore could take part in colonial parliamentary government. The result: provincial representative assemblies tended to do the bidding of their constituents rather than the royal governors. After the Seven Years' War, tension between American political and economic interests and the interests of the British government was exacerbated by Parliament's intent to restore Britsh prerogatives in America.

Tension was bound to lead to conflict, and that conflict wasn't long in coming. The American colonies were left pretty much to their own economic and political devices during the Seven Years' War, so long as they provided support for Britain's war against the French. The colonists bore the brunt of the fighting during the war against the French in North America; at war's end, they expected to be permitted to return to some semblance of self-government. It was not to be, however. Under Britain's new King and a Parliament with a new-found awareness of the American colonies' potential to enrich their colonial masters, Parliament began enacting a series of laws (Stamp Act, Townshend Acts, Sugar Act, etc.) designed to bring the colonies to heel. The colonists, thoroughly imbued with the ideals of democracy and liberty, rebelled, first through political means, and finally, inevitably, through violence.

Once "The Glorious Cause" completes its assessment of the causes of the war, it takes the reader on a fascinating journey through the war itself. The way the American Revolution was fought is frequently shrouded in the mists of legend, with great American heroes standing tall against the overwhelming might of the British and Hessian armies. There are strong elements of historical truth to that legend, but Middlekauff does an excellent job of portraying the war exactly as it was: a very closely contested fight between colonial masters and those who wished to throw off the yoke of colonialism.

There's really almost nothing to criticize in "The Glorious Cause." It is, in nearly every respect, an outstanding work of history. It's comprehensive in its scope; thorough in its approach; obviously very well researched; and imbued with careful, thoughtful, and incisive historical analysis. Middlekauff's descriptions of Revolutionary War battles are first-rate. The author completely captures the flavor of eighteenth century warfare in general, and of the battles of the American Revolution in particular. When I finished reading "The Glorious Cause," I felt as if I had actually been there at some of the great battles of the war.

One very minor caveat: because "The Glorious Cause" takes a fairly academic approach to studying the American Revolution, the book's somewhat lofty and scholarly sounding language may not appeal to readers with only a passing interest in history in general, and the American Revolution in particular. That's not to say the book has only a narrow appeal to academics and history scholars, however; it is definitely written for the general reader with a love of American history. It will, in my view, prove a most satisfying experience for the vast majority of history lovers who decide to read it.

"The Glorious Cause" is a winner of a book in every respect. With a dearth of excellent books about the American Revolution currently in print, this volume fills a crucial need for those who wish to learn about America's struggle for independence. As the inaugural volume of the "Oxford History Of The United States," "The Glorious Cause" also sets the tone for the whole series... highly readable, thoroughly imbued with first-rate scholarship and a polished, eloquent writing style; and simply a pleasure to read.

This second volume of "The Oxford History of the United States" provides an objective, sober look at the American Revolution without denying its role in world history as a truly "glorious cause". In demythologizing the war as we saw it through grade-school eyes, author Robert Middlekauff profiles our Revolutionary forebears as they really were: men of courage and vision who were not without their flaws. Likewise, the British redcoats we loved to hate may not have been entirely hostile or unsympathetic to the legitimate grievances of the Americans, yet their often condescending view of the colonists and an incompetent colonial policy gave America no option but to rebel in the end. The book's well-written accounts of the Revolution's major battles will increase the reader's understanding of political, logistical, and strategic problems on both sides which contributed to the conflict's drawn-out, six-year duration. Unlike other histories of the war which end with the Treaty of Paris in 1783, Mr. Middlekauff offers an absorbing narrative of the drafting of the Constitution in 1787 and its subsequent ratification by the states. After reading "The Glorious Cause", I can better appreciate the sacrifices made over 200 years ago by a determined people who, in defending divinely-established rights and liberties for themselves and their posterity, defended virtue and morality as well.

Believing in "intelligent design" theory as a median between two extremes is like being a little bit pregnant; intelligent design theory is no more rational than extreme creationism.

Don't waste your time reading about pseudo-science.

The Intelligent Design (ID) movement is not much over ten years old. However, catalyzed by citizen-skeptic-law professor Phillip Johnson's book "Darwin on Trail" (1991), it has made significant steps in challenging the regnant and incorrigible naturalism of the Darwinian establishment. Not to be confused with young earth creationism (fostered the by Institute for Creation Research), ID marshalls the philosophical and scientific resources of credentialed scholars who tackle the scientific adequacy of Darwinism to explain the origin and development of life. Moreover, ID is developing a positive research program for detecting design in nature that appeals to well established empirical principles. See especially the work of William Dembski (who sports doctorates in both mathematics and philosophy) in this regard ("The Design Inference," "Intelligent Design," "No Free Lunch").

Dr. Woodward skillfully charts the history of the movement in terms of its rhetoric (used in the classical sense of modes of persuasion). He finds Michael Denton's "Evolution: A Theory in Crisis" (1985) as the key text that inspired both Johnson and Michael Behe ("Darwin's Black Box" [1996]) to challenge Darwin on logical and scientific grounds. Johnson, the quintessential "outsider," emerges as the rhetorical genius of the movement.

Those interested in ID, intellectual history, and rhetorical theory will benefit from this carefully documented and well-written resource. ID is a force with which to reckon.

Douglas Groothuis, Ph.D., Denver Seminary

Doubts about Darwin is the first objective full length book about the Intelligent Design Movement (ID). The book is a revision of the author's Ph.D. thesis completed at the University of South Florida. The author is a college professor (as I am). Doubts about Darwinism answers questions about the movement such as why do so many people have doubts about Darwinism, who are they, and why is this movement growing so fast? The movement includes full-fledged senior faculty at such universities as Oxford University, Princeton, the University of Georgia, Ohio State University, Medical College of Ohio, Helsinki University of Technology in Finland, the State University of Applied Sciences in Frankfurt Germany, the University of New Brunswick, University of Sydney, University of Auckland and Hanyang University in Korea. The movement covers the gamut of disciplines, including the full range of the natural sciences. The International Society for Complexity, Information, and Design is now the professional society of the intelligent design community. The society now lists over fifty research fellows including Fritz Schaefer, the inventor of computational quantum chemistry. With almost 1,000 peer-reviewed publications, he is the third most cited chemist in the world and has been considered for a Nobel five times. All the fellows are distinguished researchers in their own right and have published extensively in the peer-reviewed literature in their respective disciplines. Woodward's book has been peer reviewed by numerous faculty and this shows. So far, I have noticed only a few minor errors! It is the most complete and accurate history of the ID movement and is must reading for friend and foes of the movement alike. It is obvious that many people who write about ID do not have an accurate understanding of the movement. The motive for the growth of ID is clearly "doubts about Darwinism" and the book covers these in some detail. This work will be the standard work in this area for some time to come.

Although very dated at this point, with no consideration given to the crucial 1995 military operations in Croatia and then Bosnia and the ensuing Dayton Accords in a revised and updated edition, "Balkan Tragedy" is still a somewhat useful source because it provides considerable in-depth analysis of the underlying economic and structural causes of Yugoslavia's break-up. Woodward also tries to broaden the scope of her analysis to consider the ways in which the wider international context influenced events in the former Yugoslavia and even fomented their intensification. However, while this approach does clarify many events that occurred after the wars in Croatia and Bosnia had already begun, Woodward does not quite succeed in providing completely credible explanations for the actual origins of the Yugoslav crisis. Despite the hefty text, extensive research and copious footnotes, one can't escape the feeling that Woodward's approach is at times piecemeal (to paraphrase her former boss, the tragicomical Yasushi Akashi), primarily when dealing with the international players (from the IMF to the EU and U.S. State Department) who she insists bear a great deal of the responsibility for the Yugoslav tragedy. For while she often provides detailed explanations of the political and economic factors and pressures at play within the former Yugoslavia and their impact on decision-making and political events (which often seems to exonerate the various Yugoslav leaders of their culpability for concrete abuses of power and war crimes), she does not similarly analyze the economic/structural aspects and motivations guiding the foreign policies of the various outside powers which could have and eventually did influence Yugoslav events - even though her approach would seem to demand such consideration. Regardless of the degree of complicity of international players in the Yugoslav tragedy (and it was great), the prime responsibility for the political breakdown and course of Yugoslavia's dissolution lies with the various post-Yugoslav leaders (some more than others). After all, they made the decisions on how to respond to and/or manipulate international (primarily economic) pressures and domestic (often nationalistic) tensions, and this is not made sufficiently clear in Woodward's book.

The book sometimes hides its thesis behind detail, and is not easy to follow. It was finished for the press before the Croat offensive of Spring 1995, and loses some perspective in consequence. Hence only four stars! It is very thoroughly researched (not just full of footnotes), and it is one of the very few books on the Bosnian war which doesn't simply pick heroes and villains - which has, of course, led to it being denounced as pro-Serb. Woodward's main line is that the basis of conflict was 'the economy, stupid'. Successive blunders in the terms of IMF loans, and misjudged changes in the federal constitution, set the constituent republics against each other. Misunderstanding of the issues (and German/Austrian favouritism to Balkan clients) led the European powers into grossly unprincipled and utopian interventions. The federation was levered apart, while preserving intact the constituent republics. This was a 'solution' to the wrong set of problems. The United States, continually encouraging the Bosnian Muslims to wait for the NATO fairy to rescue them (it didn't), completed the sorry work of war-making - though this last element is better documented elsewhere (e.g. in Rose's _Fighting for Peace_). I don't agree with all of the author's opinions. In particular, I think national allegiances run deeper and history is more relevant than she wants to believe. But it is a serious attempt to rescue this piece of contemporary history from self-indulgent moral one-upmanship and propaganda saturation. If only Woodward could write as well as Ivo Banac!

Excellent, balanced, credible and more importantly- SCHOLARLY analysis of the Balkan conflicts. Woodward's in-depth study blows away the simplistic answers other writers have offered to solving the extremely complex problems in the region. A good critique of current US foreign policy in the former Yugoslavia. Can't wait for her next book!

If it wasn't my tenacious nature, I couldn't have finished the book!

I have read this book at least twice now and it holds up to the test of time. The magnificent faith of the character Sean Conlin and others in this story inspires me every time I read it. Besides that, great story! Although, I do have to say that the hard-bitten, I'm-just-waiting-for-death-so that-all-this-suffering-is-over hero is getting a little old.

You will not be disapointed at all! I wasn't! Great plotting!

Alexander, Duke of Westlake, is a rake of the worst sort. At a party, he could have responded to one of the many tryst notes from his paramours--instead, he rushes off to see his injured nephew. On his way, Alex is attacked by highwaymen.

Shot and near-death, he winds up at the house of Arabella Tichley. She is a gentle, practical sort of girl. She loves her simple life at Mabry Green (a small village), and is described as being serious-minded and managing. Bella (and her family) nurses the duke back to health. And as Westlake's strength starts to return, the book's strengths begin to decline...

I won't tell you HOW it happens, but Bella's reputation is utterly ruined, and Westlake is involved. If you know enough about Society, gentleman's honor and ruined women--you can guess what happens next. Bella is forced into an unwanted marriage to save herself from being shunned.

I really enjoyed the first 100 pages. Up to that point, I had high hopes for the book. But then I was disappointed. At times, Alex is evasive, domineering and... boring. I was frustrated by the way he kept leaving his new duchess. Westlake's character fluctuated dramatically; therefore, I didn't feel like I really KNEW him. And while I sympathized with Bella, who was supposed to be a pratical, bookish sort of girl, I thought she was lacking in common sense. Prior to her run-in with the duke, she had a suitor who was a complete idiot. Why, oh WHY did she ever want to marry HIM?! Also, I was a bit puzzled by her desire for an annulment. Why would she trade scandal for scandal?

And while I didn't enjoy many parts of the book, I thought the last 5 pages were uplifting. Also, I would say that Rhonda Woodward has a good feel for the time period--especially considering this is only her second book. With an idea that is less commonplace and more exciting, she DOES have potential.

Where have you been, Rhonda Woodward? For those of us who appreciate strong character development, engaging and realistic dialogue and a touch of humor in the Regency genre, ... In her second book, A Hint of Scandal, she gives us interesting, believable and complex characters woven into a story line that provides mystery, inner conflict and of course, romance. The opportunity to feel the outwardly reserved Arabella Tichley's emotions as she struggles with the prospect of nursing a mysterious stranger with a gunshot wound back to health kept me unable to put the book down. I could feel her inner conflict as the stranger forced her to evaluate what had been her perfect plan to create an uneventful small village life following a marriage to the local dandy. Arabella's horror and desperate attempt to think of a way to extract herself from an extremely compromising situation was realistic and presented in a manner that I could relate to. The story's hero, the Duke of Westlake, is a man of integrity, strength and resolve to both find and deal with his attempted assassins and find a way to capture the heart of the lovely Arabella. The antics of Arabella's cousin, Lady Beatrice, who has the ability to create chaos at every turn, are what cause a variety of twists and turns in the story line. Beatrice makes the reader wonder what she could possibly do next to complicate Arabella's life, and I found myself both embracing Beatrice as a lovable character and becoming annoyed with her short-sighted perspective in the ways she attempted to help her cousin, Arabella. Rhonda Woodward is a much appreciated new voice whose strength lies in her ability to present characters who keep you coming back for more. I thoroughly enjoyed A Hint of Scandal.

I thoroughly enjoyed spending an afternoon with these delightful characters. I really love Regencies and this satisfied my craving for a good one. Though there are lots of forced marriage plots, Rhonda Woodward adds an interesting and warm approach. The story held my complete interest until the very end. Because I loved her first book so much, and this book is a great follow-up, I hope there are more books from this author in the works. A charming read.

Love him or hate him, George Bush is running a unique White House. His team stays unnervingly tightly on message, fights their battles mostly in private (one gets the sneaking suspicion that public Powell- Rumsfeld disagreements are really Bush trial balloons), is far less susceptible to leaks, and effectively changes decision in the face of adversity.

If you don't like Bush, this book will appear to be glossing over his lack of intellectual curiosity, the macho bravado of his decision-making process, and the extent to which he is a creature of the political interests that backed him in his run for office. I short, if you're a liberal and not of the "inside baseball" political junkie type, your money is best spent elsewhere as this book will just disgust you.

If you do like Bush, you will see here our "Top Gun" president (though I thought the aircraft carrier photo op was more of a "Luke Skywalker at the end of the first Star Wars" production) making decisive decisions, backing his people fully, and creating day-by-day the conditions necessary for victory.

If you're a political professional, student of politics, or lover of a good group dynamics exegesis, you will greatly enjoy this work for its exploration of all the inside dirt, machinations, and organizational behavior quirks of the world's most powerful office politics.

Obviously there are limits to what even the most diligent of journalists can re-create. And this particular perception of events is surely wrong in its particulars in many places. But as a whole, it hangs together very well, and it seems to comport with the dozens of other stories about the functionings, foibles, and folks at the White House.

There is not much in this book for the anti-Bush crowd to like. Woodward, who can hardly be called a Republican stooge, does not portray a goose-stepping Bush taking orders from a shadowy secret cabal of oil industry plutocrats while blowing his nose alternately into the Bill of Rights, the French flag, and the UN Charter.

Woodward gets inside and gets the story. He shows Condoleeza Rice again and again playing intramural referee. He not only gets the basic Rumsfeld - Powell tensions, but also shows how each man, by virtue of his background, predilections, and character, *must* be who they are.

No, this is not grand biography on the sacle of a Chernow or a Caro, and the writing is easy, brisk, and clear. Given the subject matter, time to produce, salience, and access, though, Woodward has scored a real hit.

Woodward quite reasonably focuses on six principals: Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, Tenet & Rice. This is a simplification and we are certainly missing the slightly broader backstory in which the two dozen closest aides to those six jockey, wiggle, horsetrade and backstab as they provide, deny and spin information to their superiors. But it is a necessary and reasonable simplification that shows us the broader truths. And Woodward provides enough glimpses of these backstage battles to feel real.

Other excellently handled vignettes include the lonely CIA operative in Afghanistan and the essential diplomacy pursued with Pakistan in the weeks after 9/11.

Again, this book is for the political junkie or the partisan Republican only, our friends on the other side of the aisle would be best off saving their money for something less vexing.
Anybody who has experience with small group dynamics will be fascinated by this account at that level alone. I'm certain that Woodward's skill could make a Nebraska state party convention seem just as riveting. The stakes involved amplify the importance, interest and our enjoyment, of the story.

Bush at War offers an often fascinating glimpse into what was happening in the White House ahead of the war in Afghanistan that followed in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on New York and Washington. But it necessarily suffers from the problems that any writer addressing current events and people still in power suffers from: the knowledge that what is written will have an impact on the way the writer is treated and the access he is given in the future.

That is especially true of Bob Woodward. Dating back nearly 30 years to when he and partner Carl Bernstein famously made names for themselves by uncovering much of the Watergate scandal, Mr. Woodward's strength has always been his ability to track down information rather than a talent for putting events into perspective. With Bush at War, I could almost feel certain editorial decisions being made to protect that access to information above all else.

In fact, some of that access seems to have been limited despite the care he took. In painting a picture of the president's decision-making, the book is notably light on first-hand information from Vice President Dick Cheney or Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, for example, and much heavier on the views of Secretary of State Colin Powell.

That imbalance is not ideal, but it does present one of its unlikely strong points: while the views of the hawkish Cheney/Rumsfeld faction of the White House's advisory team are well known (because they were turned into action on the battlefield and on the diplomatic front) Mr. Woodward's efforts here give us an interesting perspective on what might have been had the more multilateralist and tactful Secretary Powell had his way.

Woodward' account of the post 9/11 crisis, the road to war with Afghanistan and an eventual commentary on an impending Iraq conflict is fluid and informative. For those skeptical of GW Bush, his executive ablities and whether he is "up to the task" this book provides an unbias documentary of the inner functions of the president and his war cabinet. It covers in depth daily NSC meetings, previous undisclosed information, political personalities, relationships, and the overall tone and focus of the White House on its cautious road to war. What I found most surprising was Bush's careful expression and delegation of proper and effective authority; probably his most valuable trait. And secondly the non-dominance of "Hawks" Rumsfeld and Cheney, and the complete absence of Karl Rove from any War Council proceedings. While not a riveting page turner, the book is a must for political junkees, for anyone interested in the active function of the executive branch in time of crisis, and for anyone with previous doubts on Bush' ability to lead effectively.

The account of Mr. Woodward (this time authorized!) regarding the quest for, and conquest of the White House by William Jefferson Clinton, made me realize very much about the man, and the politics that surround US Government. Though not usually my cup of tea (the book was a gift, I felt obligated!) it did reveal the machinations of the Federal Machine, and how you've got to do a little back rubbing for everyone to get anything done. That fact that Clinton and his team did so almost masterfully made the book worth reading right there. As with any President, or politician for that matter, Clinton did fall on his face a sufficient number of times, whether they were personal or political. His intelligence and charisma was artfully brought through by the author in a most skillful way. A must read for anyone trying to understand Clinton or his White House.

If you're looking for a critical analysis of the first 100 days of the Clinton White House, this is not the book for you. Woodward's unimpeachable ability to get the most minute human details about his subject merely presents the scene; he leaves it to others to blow rhetoric hot and cold about our controversial President. Woodward places the reader inside the White House, where you feel the frenzied pressure of trying to pass an economic reform package. And for a political junkie, Woodward's fly-on-the-wall style of reporting is great fun. Congress emerges as a hodge-podge of competing special interests and constituencies, and you feel the White House's frustration with it's own ignorance of Byzantium On The Potomac. The Outsiders from Arkansas receive their crash course in Washington politics, and it's not pretty. With every compromise struck, two hard-won bargains are lost. Yet the players never seem petty, but merely hostage to the varied yet insatiable demands of the American electorate. These are men and women of conscience and duty, yet must work in the most competitive of environments. After reading this account, one cannot help but reconsider his last diatribe about the bums in Washington: Woodward eloquently and entertainingly presents the burdens The System imposes on our elected officials and their staffs. All in all, an entertaining, surprisingly fast read

The Agenda written by Bob Woodward, pertains to Bill Clinton's first year in office. It's mostly about the battle and struggle for the new (at the time) president to get his budget and economic recovery package passed through Congress. It's amazing, but I never realized how much of a tough job it is to be president.

Shortly after winning the presidency in November of 1992 over incumbent President George Bush Clinton soon had to both come to grips and realize that his work was cut out a lot more for him, than he, or his campaign staff could've ever realized. Ultimately, he had to accept the fact that he would have to do some drastic compromising from his campaign promises. Clinton of course campaigned to be a "New Democrat" who would restore the economy to the forgotten middle-class and overturn the Reagan-Era greed of the 1980s, by investing in jobs, education, and health insurance reform. After meeting with Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan, he soon realized that it wouldn't be so easy. As it would turn out, taking bold action to reduce the overwhelming national deficit would become the top-notch priority of his economic recovery plan, and would hog up most of his budget. Therefore his beloved domestic investment agenda would have to be sacrificed. Including his promised tax-cut for the middle-class.

So even before, let alone after Clinton took the oath of office, Clinton had his work cut out for him. He had to realize
early that his approval ratings would sink miserably and there would be disenchantment among his strongest supporters, let alone the American people. In many ways, two camps developed in his White House. There were the fiscal conservatives such as Robert Rubin, Leon Panetta, David Gergan. Then there were those from his campaign staff who wanted him to continue with his campaign pledges of investment such as Paul Begala, George Stephanapolis, and James Carville.

Greenspan's influence over the new president was amazing. Although it was from a neutral point of view, Greenspan
made Clinton understand how it was crucial that Clinton tackle the deficit. Or else long-term interest rates would never come down and the economy would never take off. Without the economy taking off, no way would Clinton ever be able to get back to doing the things that he was elected to do, let alone re-elected in 1996. Clinton had to come to accept that he would have to sacrifice many things, among them, his political popularity, but know that the long term effects would pay off dividends for both him politically, and for the US economy.

Fortunately for him, it did apparently work out for the best, and he did (with the extreme help of a Republican Congress
balance the federal budget in 1997) reduce the deficit and gave us a budget surplus. What should also be strongly considered is that he did this, at the behest of cutting the DOD and the intelligence community, which contributes to events such as September 11th, 2001.

What is also amazing about this book, is that Woodward gives you a fly-on-the-wall view of the battle to pass this
budget through both the House and the Senate. It also gives you the word for word account of a bitter phone conversation between Clinton and Nebraska Democratic Senator Bob Kerry, in which Clinton tells Kerry to go f--- himself, when Kerry refuses to vote for his budget, which turned out to be the crucial vote.

As it would turn out, Kerry would vote for it, making it a tie. Gore then gave the over the top vote and the budget was
passed.

This book was very, very good, and that is why I was able to go through it so quickly.

-Nicholas J. Vertucci

Woodward's book is, of course, flawed like Judy Belushi's "Samurai Widow"; but other than these two books there is nothing more of Belushi to refer back to, in the written form. There will always be the SNL videos, the Blues Brothers CDs, or the handful of movies John did, but where does one interested enough start from when they want to make some chronological order of Belushi's life; to learn more about his exhuberent ascent, his tumultuous descent and his final dark months, weeks and days? Bob Woodward gives the reader a dry and thorough, if not somewhat-slanted, take on John Belushi's 33 years on planet Earth. The reader simply cannot help but get the feeling that the author is emphasizing the downward spiral and the end of a manically funny man, which is why this book wasn't received very well when it was first released, back in 1984.. Still, from JB's days in Wheaton, Illinois, Second City Chicago and National Lampoon, to Saturday Night Live, Hollywood and the Chateau Maramont Bungalow #3, Woodward's book is worth 3 1/2 starts and, at the very least, one good read-through.

John Belushi was a funny man but his story was not very funny. Bob Woodward does an incredible job of dredging up Belushi's life from a scared high school kid trying out for a play in Chicago to his coughing fit right before he died. It seems Woodward only focuses on the negatives in the book, but John Belushi's life was too short to have too many ultimite highs. SNL was a huge hit, so was Animal House, and so were the Blues Brothers. Belushi barely made 5 million dollars in his life and he spent that quickly on cocaine. He loved life so much, he never wanted to sleep. Woodward details all of it, in gut-wrenching detail. At times, Belushi's behavior gets redundant and Woodward's journalistic style gets a tad boring, but it is a good, quick read. If you can find the book and you were ever mesmerized by one of Belushi's characters, this book is a great read.

I was a John Belushi fan from the first episode of "Saturday Night Live" and I think his performance in ANIMAL HOUSE puts him in the same league with the great film comedians of all time. I still vividly remember hearing about his death in March 1982 and still wonder what might have been if he was still around.
And I've read WIRED several times.

It's a horrible tragedy what happened to him, but hopefully some people can take something away from this book--see the warning and avoid the same the fate. I think the book is well-written and well-researched (I particularly liked how Woodward strictly reported the facts: someone saw Belushi in the company of a Playboy bunny and Woodward leaves it only at that--when other writers would've piled on leering speculations). If there is ever a reprint, I think there should be a new chapter by Woodward reflecting on his experience or at least the article (in ROLLING STONE?) that covered the controversy and fallout of the book's initial printing.

Nothing can change what a great talent John Belushi was. The sad details of his final days haven't diminished his accomplishments--but they did make for a scary, compelling book about the underside of Hollywood and man overwhelmed by his appetites.
(And stay way away from the obscene film version!)

What makes Bob Woodward such a prominent author and journalist is his ability to get behind the scenes of important events and key people and report them to mass audiences. In "The Choice," Woodward's talent is handicapped in several respects. First, the subject matter - the early rounds of the 1996 presidential election- is only mildly interesting. Second, much of Woodward's information was already public knowledge at the time of the book's release. Finally, the author is so caught up in getting the "inside story," he loses sight of the election's broad themes. He loses the big picture. A respectable work but there are better books about this subject.

The Choice, written from November of 1994-early summer of 1996, is all about the decision making, staffs, fund-raising, advertisements, and financial tumbles of a presidential campaign. Woodward capture the essence of two campaigns and strategies. The two being, President Clinton, and Senate Majority Leader Robert Dole.

For the coverage of President Bill Clinton, it is very fascinating! In many ways this book follows up where Woodward leaves off with The Agenda. Only in the portrayal of Clinton here is of a President who has regained not only his confidence, but ultimately control of his White House and presidency. The Clinton White House of the first two year of the administration, as mostly everyone knows, was a disaster in the works. The Clinton White House of the last two years of the first term (1995-96), was much more controlled and disciplined. In The Choice, we see the emergence of political guru Dick Morris make his presence felt and heard through the Clinton camp. You get an illustration of how other Clinton staff and advisors such as White House Chief of Staff Leon Pannetta, George Stephanopolus, and Press Secretary Mike McCurry have their head-on collisions with Morris and his triangulation strategy, of polling the issues
most important to the American people and advising Clinton to follow that path to reelection. Which he ultimately did.

In The Choice, we also learn of a new key figure that will make his rise in the Democratic political process fundraising guru and mastermind Terry McAullif (now chairman of the DNC, handpicked by Clinton right before he left office). You see the mass fundraising effort led by McAullif who raised unprecedented amounts of cash for both the DNC, as well as the Clinton-Gore 1996 reelection bid. The money that was used to fund the now infamous Medicare-Scare television adds that dominated key voting districts and states. The adds that would turn the tide for Clinton, stopping the roaring tide that was giving the Republicans and the "Contract with America" such momentum throughout 1994-95, and going into the election year of 1996. The Medicare adds that would scare seniors into thinking that Gingrich and Dole were going to eliminate Medicare, Medicaid, social security. Woodward gives in his final analysis, that these adds are what would give the Clinton his reelection.

The Choice also tells the story of the rough and tumble of making the decision and running of a presidential campaign. The enormous amounts of key staff people, ect. The Choice, gives you the view of the campaign of the Republican front-runner, then Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole. All I could really say to this, is I now know, more than ever, on why I felt even then (in 1996) that the nominating of Bob Dole by the Republicans in attempt to bring down Bill Clinton, was a complete debacle. We get an image of a candidate who was a good, honest, man, but whom was too wishy-washy on the issues, and his past voting record throughout his congressional career. It shows how Dole
was a horrible speaker, and how disarray his campaign and staff was. Dole would have on so many occasions, be in the position of having to make an important stump speech, and his speechwriters wouldn't be giving him the material until moments before he was to take the podium. It also waists no time explaining on how Dole wasn't exactly the best communicator in the world either. But ultimately, Woodward's conclusion, which is no surprise the same conclusion of this reviewer, as well as most of America, that Dole just didn't have a message for what he wanted to do and more importantly, why he wanted to be President. The age factor didn't help either.

The Choice also covers many other interesting people and names that dominated the political scene and captured the minds and imaginations of most politicos throughout this era. As I mentioned in the previous paragraph, the book also gives you an idea of the decision to run for President, or not. Through this, we hear of many other people's decision and weighing in on whether to run, or not. We go through California governor Pete Wilson, Tennessee Senator Lemar Alexander, former Vice President Dan Quayle, Texas Senator Phil Gramm. The spoilers also are mentioned in this book with no punches held, such as right-wing zealot Pat Buchannan, Ross Perot, and Steve Forbs. You also learn of, why the most sought after candidate, decided not to run. That possible candidate is non other than the former Chairman of the JCS, Colin Powell.

Other's mentioned were Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, and his childish charades and temper tantrums, which helped add to his unpopularity and eventual demise. We also get a fly-on-the-wall view of the infamous budget battle between the Clinton White House and the congressional GOP of 1995, and then the government shutdown. Also included is Clinton's desperate dealing to get a peace accord in Bosnia. Bob Dole's decision to sacrifice his Senate seat and status of Majority Leadership, for his campaign. So The Choice, goes beyond just the campaign.

For me, what I came away with from this book more than anything else, was the way Bill Clinton grew-up so the speak, and into the Presidency. Now, I'm obviously not referring to his personal conduct, but as a leader, and the power that was within his grasp. The power that the office of the American Presidency gives to anyone to potentially use who occupies the Oval Office. It also gave me a different view of the man!!! Normally, and in the past I have always viewed Clinton like many of his campaign staffers, and of his generation. A person who is arrogant and unappreciative of the old and those past who have paid their dues. In The Choice, Woodward gives you a vision of a man who often at times would tear into his staff members, for taking cheap shots at people such as Newt Gingrich. For instance, Clinton ripped into Mike McCurry once for taking a pot shot at Speaker Gingrich in a White House press briefing. So it portrayed
a side of the man, that I never knew, or thought possibly existed.

The portion that I enjoyed the most, was how behind the scenes both Clinton and Dole (even throughout the campaign of 1996) had a very cordial relationship, and tremendous respect for one another. At one point, Clinton.....after a major budget meeting in the Cabinet Room, pulled Dole aside and proposed that they find a solution on how to reform welfare, under the table, no politics involved. Another fascinating tale, was when Clinton stunned people like George Stephanopolus and others in his close inner-circle, on why he really wanted Bob Dole to win the Republican Nomination during the Primary season, because he felt that if something were to happen to him, or if he lost reelection
due to a crisis, he believed Dole was the only rational and able leader in the GOP. That shocked me!!!

In the end, it just goes to show, how interesting the world of American politics truly is! The relationship between
Clinton and Dole, even in spite of something as heavy as a presidential campaign and election, was very, very impressing.

The Choice, no doubt proves once again on why Bob Woodward is considered to be, perhaps the best political writer
in our times. I plan to soon read his 2000 best seller The Shadow: The Tale of Watergate and Five Presidents. of Clinton, Reagan, ect. Woodward is also due to come out with his latest book sometime in November, and the title is to be called Bush At War, I'm sure it will be revealing and a bestseller. I will send a review of the TR book when I am finished.

-Nicholas J. Vertucci

Ok, I admit it; I am a big fan of Woodward. I will read everything he puts out and probably enjoy it. With that being said here is another book of his that I will profess to really enjoying. For my money he is the best political writer in the business today. He has so many contacts that many times in reading the book you could swear he has the White House bugged. This book follows the Clinton team through the two years leading up to the 1996 presidential elections. He does a great job of following both campaigns and paralleling the issues so that you get both sides. You get all the standard Woodward items with the book, great details, wonderful he said - she said conversations that really make you feel like a fly on the wall, an easy to follow and well laid out book.

I have read the book All Too Human that George Stephanopoulos wrote and in the book he describes the interviewing technique of Woodward, he stated that Woodward has a great style of getting you comfortable with him and then before you know it you are spilling all the secrets. What was also interesting is that Stephanopoulos wrote that Woodward audio tapes all of his interviews so that leads me to believe that the information in his books has not gone through a reporter taking notes loss of detail. One last bit of info is the Stephanopoulos said that once "The Agenda" came out the Clinton's got so mad at George for all of the info he told Woodward that they basically shut him out for a year. That must mean Woodward got it right.

A good follow up to this book is the Woodward book "The Agenda" which is the Clinton White House the first two years and the Elizabeth Drew book "Showdown: The Struggle between the Gingrich Congress and the Clinton White House", it picks up where The Agenda leaves off. This is an interesting book that I really enjoyed. If you like Woodward you will like this book, if you are interested in the first two years of the Clinton presidency then this is also a good source of information.

This book starts off boring, never picks up, and finishes with a big yawn as well. The characters and plot are flat, and it was a chore to get through the book. I tried picking up the sequel to "get through it", and I couldn't stand slogging my way through another of these books and had to put it down to read something else. I somewhat got the feeling that the author was trying, in some way shape or form, to produce a mystery that also contained elements or hints of "The Tale of Genji", with the end result being a very boring read. Don't waste your time with this book, or it's sequel.

I found this book to be elegantly written, very Zen in its spareness and simplicity. The heroine, Lady Aoi leads a quiet life as lady-in-waiting to a princess of the Imperial Court, where she is friends with the Great Minister of the Right and uses her medical skills to treat the Emperor for an eye disorder. Conflict and intrigue soon arise, however; escaping from a journey into exile Lady Aoi uses the help of those inside and outside the court to discover a traitor.

Exquisite period detail and an understanding of "the world above the clouds," where a raised fan across black eyes can conceal hatred as well as modesty, mark Ms. Woodward's work. You can almost hear the rasp of the reed pen Lady Aoi uses to create her calligraphy, see the twilight fall on pine trees shadowing miniature gardens. There is no unwarranted movement, no undo haste, yet Woodward manages to convey a sense of urgency as Lady Aoi works to discover the source of the dangerous lust for power that threatens all. By choice, Lady Aoi conceals her own involvement in the unfolding of the plot: "It was always her desire to be unremarkable, to retain the freedoms of an ordinary woman."

A note regarding the editing: the book I read has several typographical errors in it, including an error of word omission near the end of the book ...

I became an easy victim to Ann Woodward's highly readable and plausible yarn, set in 11th Century Japan. The story has a gothic tone, with a sense of ancient Japanese mystery and ritual that is neither too overbearing or too obtuse. The political drama captured in the story is every bit as grippping as Patricia Cornwell's bloody work. This effort of Woodward will find a place in my heart next to the other ancient historical mysteries I enjoy so well: Van Gulik's Judge Dee (Woodward's character is better developed emotionally), Lindsey Davis' Marcus Didio Falco (a better sense of humor), and Steven Saylor's Gordianus the Finder (a deeper, though much less poetic, sense of historical accuracy). I'm ready for the next one! Please make it soon, Ms. Woodward!!