Democrat, Republican, or Independent, it doesn't matter - "It Takes A Village" has a good message and touches upon a variety of issues regarding our society and children today. Though she does offer some Pollyanna anecdotes about her husband Bill and daughter Chelsea, the book is an enjoyable read and offers some great insights to how our country can rally together for our children.

Mrs. Clinton uses the analogy of the village as a place where the common good of all members, especially the children were taken into consideration and given priority as an investment to the village's future....she compares other nations and uses examples of how their social programs are focusing on children and how successful they appear to be. Mrs. Clinton also incorporates stories of her childhood and the era she was raised in; she does not boast but rather helps us to see how our society has changed and how desperately we need to make provisions to ensure some basics are again instituted in our culture. Mrs. Clinton stresses the importance of adults as role models, how neighborhoods have come together to push crime out of and reclaim their community, how important it is to have safe places to play and stresses the need for bipartisan support in government regarding our children and their education. The need for governmental supported programs for after school, etc. is also mentioned, and that the majority of the changes should start in the home. Mrs. Clinton makes us acutely aware of the media assault that are children are subject to, and that violence, sex and rape have become commonplace via television, music lyrics, and video games.

Mrs. Clinton also touches upon other timely subjects such as gun control, health care, and enhancing public policies to support parents and caregivers. It is evident in reading "It Takes A Village" that Mrs. Clinton has a message: that we need to come together as a society and raise our children collectively and with prudence as an investment in our future.

First, of the reviews I've read, far too many of the negative ones were from those who obviously didn't read the book. Those who severely damned it, most likely wouldn't have given Mrs. Clinton the pleasure of their having bought her book. Also, these reviews offer nothing more than a mere, simple-minded critique of the book's title.

While I can certainly agree with the opinion that Mrs. Clinton's book does include, to some extent, mild political propaganda regarding social programs, we must keep in mind that the work is a collection of Hillary Rodham Clinton's personal views. It's absolutely pointless for anyone to share his/her views in a book without supporting those opinions--thus creating propaganda. It's a no-brainer that the author would back up his/her views only with the facts that best support the opinions while shying away from those that do not.

As far as the title of the book is concerned, it certainly DOES take a village to raise a child, and as Mrs. Clinton points out, the village WILL raise the child, with or without the parents. Those parents who carefully guide their children in what they see as the best direction have much better control over the extent the village raises their children. Therefore, those who fail to take an active role in their childrens' lives are essentially leaving the job to the community, which definately has more than its fair share of negative influences and role models that tend to serve as predators waiting for the misguided or the unguided. The two choices we as parents have are either to guide our children around the negative influences and toward the positive ones, or to allow our children to wander without us through a labyrinth of the above-mentioned "predators" which include violence, recreational sex, substance abuse, reckless conduct, and other immoralities. This is only the beginning! The cycle continues and feeds on itself to populate the "village" with even more of the negative influences, thus making it even more difficult for the best of parents to guide their children in the right direction.

If it were possible for only the mothers and fathers to raise the children, the world would be almost perfect as even the most uninvolved parents have the best intentions. Unfortunately, far too many leave the job strictly to the village. Our children are raised with or without us. The numbers of prisons, crisis centers, psychiatric units, and adult literacy programs are only a few products of only the village raising our children.

My leanings are more right than left but I would take issue with anyone who actually read this book (not just decided to berate the title because you don't like the author) and didn't conclude that Hillary Clinton is every bit a proponent of "family values" as the most right-wing republican.

Mrs. Clinton gives the reader a compelling portrait of her vision for America's Children. To all the rocket scientists who'se reviews made the bold statement "It takes a Mother and Father to raise a Child" you are completely missing the point and obviously didn't read paragraph one of the book. In no way does Clinton devalue parental roles she simply acknowledges that at other people have effects on a child's well being. Children rely on safe neighborhoods, good teachers, readily available health-care and many other facets of "The Village" to be raised properly.

Within the book Ms. Clinton introduces a whole litany of social programs some of which I agree with (better health education and diets in school's to combat obesity, required marital counseling, ) and some of which I don't (socialist medicine and Charter Schools--the former will never fly in this country and the latter are proving to be a flop). Reasonable people can disagree, and while I don't see eye to eye with Clinton on some issues her objective is noble and her writing is enjoyable. FOr the record if Chelsea is any indication--Hillary Clinton is an excellent Mom.

There's little middle ground in this country when it comes to Hillary---I've heard the most vile and disgusting things uttered about her and I've seen her almost worshipped. I like to think I can be part of that middle ground--a right-winger who appreciates the intelligent passionate argument that she brings to the table.

"What makes a leader truly great?" [reads the back jacket of this book...] "Is it simply a matter of management style or personality?"

No, answers the author -- it is simply a matter of being a good Christian. But what is a good Christian? Why, that is simply someone who believes exactly as Marvin Olasky believes. It's just that simple...

unfortunately, the book also irritated me, and I have never been called a liberal by anyone. While I appreciated Olasky's assertion that private morals DO matter in public office, I thought his approach was simplistic and narrow. If one takes Olasky's arguments to their logical conclusion, one would have to say that there aren't too many people in the history of humankind who have adopted the correct religious view. Olasky's version of heaven is going to be quite thinly populated I suspect...Jefferson, who was a founding father of our republic and doubled its size while in office, is portrayed as a godless, snobby, scheming, screw-up. Jackson, a violent man who defied the Supreme Court and signed the death warrant for thousands of civilized Cherokees seeking legal redress, is portrayed as your favorite god-fearing uncle. I suppose the battalions of left-wing revisionists brought this sort of book upon themselves in a way, but sometimes I just wish the pendulum could settle in the middle for a while. History should be about getting at the TRUTH, not supporting your pet argument at all costs.

Conclusion: the less thoughtful among the fundamentalist Christians will find fodder for their arguments here and will save having to read all the real history in the bargain. The Clinton-esque liberals will bust veins in the heads over this outrage. The true historians will quietly shake their heads and toss this book aside.

I purchased this volume after watching Olasky on C-Span. Being familiar with his magazine, "World," and the Turning Point Christian Worldview Series which he edited, I was impressed with his thesis: character counts. To Olasky, character is displayed by the diligence one gives to daily duty--fidelity to one's faith, fidelity to one's mate, fidelity to one's deepest covenents. Though perhaps simplistic and certainly not an exhaustive list of criteria by which to judge a man, these are fundamental to what a man becomes. Moral vision--character--counts. In this, Olasky is on target.

Olasky's efforts to review the moral and social characteristics of select American leaders, both political and social is clear in its content and abolute in the documented truth he brings to light. A number of the subjects reviewed clearly illustrate the dilemma of American culture - pragmaticism at the sacrifice of ideals higher and more substantive than the needs of the moment. Judeo-Christian ethic, the core of our history, is brought to light in a very real manner. Political history students of all ages will benefit by his illustrations and analysis.

Much as I treasure the right of free speech and a free press in our country, I have real reservations about anyone assigning themselves the job of being the biographer/interpreter of a political figure.

After reading Gail Sheehy's latest book, I've got to say I lost respect for her. Although well-written, as usual, throughout I felt "creepy-crawly" to imagine what a connection would be like with a well-known writer who takes it upon her self to tell us who Hillary Clinton "really is," after establishing a personal friendship with her subject. As a friend, I would never speak to her again again. I would feel most certainly used. I would feel that my life was simply useful to her as a means to exploit me for profit and celebrity. This strong feeling overrode, for me, my appreciation of the book's good writing.

It looks like the book will receive wide reading and recognition. I would say to the reader, keep in mind, this book was written for entertainment and money, disguised as "educational and compassionate." After the flurries settle down, I wish the best possible outcome for Hillary.

Hillary's Choice by Gail Sheehey 2000

A Balanced Portrait (five stars)

I think Gail Sheehey has done a remarkable job of combining her interviews, the second hand sources and published materials in preparing this portrait of Hillary Clinton.

This book most certainly will raise Hillary's ire because it is not entirely flattering, yet it is not a condemnation of Mrs. Clinton either.

I think Sheehey is quite fair in her overall account of Hillary Clinton's life.The book was an excellent read and kept me engaged as a reader.

Mrs. Clinton is certainly no innocent in the political world and in her personal relationship with Bill Clinton.

I have to remark that my views of Mrs. Clinton have wavered over the years of the current Presidency. At the start I had the impression she was an overbearing individual who indeed did want to engage in a co-presidency with her husband. Our system is not designed for a co-presidency and we elected Bill Clinton for the position, not Bill and Hillary. As a result I found her to be a bit hard to take as the first term went through its first two years.

I did support her wide-ranging vision for a National Health Care Plan and was sorry to see it fail for political reasons.

As she was taken out of the loop (at least publicly) in seeming to be at the helm of the country with Bill Clinton, I found her public behavior more appropriate.

Over the years my attitude toward Hillary has waxed and waned. This of course is how I interpreted this woman from how I saw her through the eyes of the abundant media stories about her.

I believe Sheehey offers a substantive and psychologically well nuanced portrait of Hillary. Overall, I don't feel much sorrow or admiration for the woman. She is an individual who wants to play in the big leagues and she has indeed had that opportunity. She hasn't been softened by the experienced -- rather, she seems to be an angrier and yet more determined politician who certainly doesn't intend to end her stature as a woman of high visibility with the close of her husband's publicity. She wants more -- for reasons I can't quite fathom.

All in all, I believe the Clintons are both highly dysfunctional people who continue to overachieve in order to hide their own scars. It appears they will do so at any cost; sadly using the currency of other human beings without much regard.

While there have been accomplishments during this Presidency, I am certain that this country has not deserved what it has been dragged through as a result of two unhealthy individuals with enormous amounts of power.

Daniel J. Maloney

I have had the dubious pleasure of reading and rereading quite a number of works addressing the life and times of Hillary Clinton.
While I am not a great fan of Billie, I must admit to sort of an admiration for Hillary. Be-that-as-it-may, I enjoyed this book. It was well written and I thought pretty well ballanced. Many of the "facts" presented, will have to be tested by time, but for now, I feel they are probably as close to the truth we will get.
Ms Clinton is certainly one of the more fascinating individuals of our times and I am quite sure history will continue to judge her as such. She is an interesting subject. In many ways, she is us. The author of this book is an interesting writer and between the author and the subject, we get a very interesting story. Thank you Ms Gail for writing it.

As a foreigner who has seen the US from abroad throughout the last decade, I must say I was very disapointed by this book. How is it possible to create so much garbage and put it indise a cover, and then get it sold?!!! For a long time I followed the US-debate over the Clintons. And for a long time I thought Hillary Clinton's acusations about a conspiracy was a bit over the top. But after reading this I am in no doubt: The Clintons have recieved a lot more negativety than they deserve! And thruth be told, Bill Clinton was a leader we in the rest of the world had confidence in. He was though on behalf of his nation, but he was a leader in wich we felt trust.

For readers with only a passing interesting in Bill Clinton, this is a short, succint book that you can complete in a day. But for readers looking for bigger game, read "First in His Class" by the same author. That book is the best Clinton biography on the market, covering his life from childhood to his 1992 presidential run. This book was published just before Clinton's impeachment by the House. The author gives some new insights, going through the president's August 17 confession line-by-line, and interprets its meaning. You sense Mr. Maraniss's frustration and obvious disappointment with his subject. But at the same time, he maintains a hue of fairness and objectivity that is badly needed when compared to other Clinton books. Mr. Maraniss will help you understand Bill Clinton, but the truth is that no person can fully understand this true "enigma."

Maraniss did such a good job in his full-scope Clinton biography ("First In His Class") that if you've read it you'd (almost) be able to come up with a summary of your own to explain his 4-minute speech, which is nominally the subject of the Clinton Enigma. There's very little new in this book to be missed if you have not read it. What is new is in the first 13 pages (Chapters 1-4 of the first part of the book), where Maraniss mentions his own experiences with Clinton (or rather: the lack of them) when trying to arrange an interview with him, immediately prior and also after his biography was published. The manners and maneuvers Clinton and his aides applied and Maraniss' reaction provide a valuable supplement to understanding Clinton, but also Maraniss.

The weakness of this book for those who have read the biography is also an advantage for those who haven't and if you are not as interested in Clinton to devote yourself to reading 500 pages of the biography you will appreciate its summarized version in the Clinton Enigma.

You people who buy into this nonsense are truly, truly sad.. I don't get angry or even try to dispute this stuff anymore. If you were capable of any shred of open minded argument based on fact and evidence you wouldn't be in this situation. Let history judge Bill Clinton, and his detractors. We will see who looks foolish.

The book is readable and gives you enough details to be entertaining yet not boring.

I had often wondered why there was so little of Bill Clinton's past covered in print media. Now I know.

If only 5% of the cases reviewed in the book are true, then Ken Starr has plenty to cook this guy.

This book is a must for those who deal specifically with nightly news. You'll read things that I don't think you'll hear on the ABC, NBC, etc.

It is so unblievable that this type of corruption can still exist in todays media filled arena.

The book was readable and gave you enough details to be entertaining but not boring.

I had often wondered why there was so little of Bill Clinton's past covered in print media. Now I know.

If only 5% of the cases reviewed in the book are true, then Ken Starr has plenty to cook this guy.

This book is a must for those who deal specifically with nightly news. You'll read things that I don't think you'll hear on the ABC, NBC, etc.

It is so unblievable that this type of corruption can still exist in todays media filled arena.

I don't even know what Bob Barr's contribution to this piece of trash was - considering he's a racist, lying, philandering little midget who is one of the biggest hypocrites around. and he's probably illiterate too!

As a gigantic scoresheet on Bill Clinton's abuses of power and why people at least _ought to_ care about them, this book is right on target. But as a valid predictor of the future or a handbook for practical action, this book does not qualify. And as a novel, _Huckleberry Finn_ it isn't. It is, in the end, wishful thinking.

Tyrrell's major handicap is that he is trying to move from the realm of journalistic editorship to the realm of novel-writing, and simply doesn't have the skills for it. Simply put, Mark Twain he isn't. When I read a novel, I expect an in-depth study of the characters and the situation. I expect to be told not just _what_ the characters do, but _why_ they do it. And the "why" inevitably goes much deeper than "that Bill Clinton may be a scumbag, but he's _our_ scumbag," and is definitely more complicated than that.

But instead of depth of characterization and background, I get Barney Frank and Charles Schumer acting like Rush Limbaugh's favorite caricatures of them. I also get Sonny Bono behaving as though he were once again doing one of his television shows, instead of participating in arguably the most _serious business_ of all our lives--and again, with no explanation of Sonny's behavior. And I get thirteen Democratic "crossover Senators" who make the difference between "Guilty" and "Not Guilty" in the Senate--but with no, or scant, explanation of _why_ they cross over. Compare Tyrrell's Frank and Schumer with Twain's "King and Duke," and compare Tyrrell's Sonny Bono to Twain's Tom Sawyer, and you'll see what I mean.

I would certainly hope that the _real_ Bob Barr (who has just filed an impeachment resolution in the House in real life), the _real_ Henry Hyde, and the _real_ Orrin Hatch and Arlen Specter would make a better effort than this to (a) gather intelligence on the other side, and (b) make a coherent plan to win people over, through appeals to emotions either noble or ignoble. Tyrrell's book is not a plan. It is a wish. A wish that I myself will fully acknowledge sharing, but a wish nonetheless. And again, as a novel, it is far too pedestrian ever to take itself, or be taken, seriously.

The trouble is that I think Bill Clinton _should_ be impeached, and for the reasons that Tyrrell states, and for other actions and policies of his that are tantamount to treason. But by the time the professional book reviewers--which is to say, those who actually write novels for a living--get through with this book, they'll start such a drumbeat against it that the American people will lose its message in their disappointment in the finished work. And that's too bad for the country.

I expected this book to be an ultra-conservative raving against Clinton. Instead, I found it to be the best recap of every scandal (so far) that has swirled around Clinton. The fictional part is interspersed with copies of actual documents of prior hearings, White House memos, etc. This book should be required reading for all citizens, for them to see all in one place the myriad of abuses and coverups which we have allowed to happen due to our nonchalance and feeling of "everybody does it". The historical part of the book is irrefutable, and much of it are things I have never heard previously, or certainly never read about in the media!

A book full of unsubstantiated and outright fradulent allegations co-written by convicted child pornographer Richard Delgaudio...not recommended.

China doll, a book written by Roger Canfield and Richard Delgaudio, is more than a rush to judgement of what happen to Nuclear weapon secrets, it express a hate for the Clinton Presidency with, unsubstaniated, charges that part of his campaign money came from the Red Chinese. There are many wild charges like this one in this book.

There is also a long list of false chages made against Los Alamos scientist Wen Ho Lee. He is accused of downloading 50 years of Nuclear secrets and giving them to chinese agents during one of his trips to china.

The spy charges against Dr. Lee were false, and it was something he was never charged with. At this time Dr. Lee is free with 58 of the 59 charges against him dropped. With one kept on him to keep the Justice dept. and Energy dept. from looking totally ridiculous.

China doll shows no proof, or even sources that prove their charges against President Clinton. And the few sources quoted in this book have been discredited or suspect.

ABC News.com writer wrote an article [Errors mar the cox report] that discredits the report put together by Rep. Christopher Cox. The article cited false information and a distortion of facts and history on Nuclear Weapons Spying.

APB News.com writer also wrote an article critical of the report for the same reasons.

And there are a number of web sites by people who have knowledge in the area of science and nuclear energy who researched the report and have also discredited it.

The New York Times story that help start this by publishing charges by Notra Trulock, a former energy dept. security official. The Times made no attempt to prove these charges true before publishing the article.

Their other sources of information include the Washington Times and the World Net Daily. Both are Conservative and not fans of President Clinton, which translates in to bias reporting.

An investigation has shown no link to Dr. Lee and Los Alamos over the stolen "Crown Jewels" of the Nuclear arsenal that included the W-88. It also showed that Clinton was not lax in investigating charges of espionage. Dr. Lee name was dropped by the Justice Dept. as a suspect.

There will be many people who will read China doll, and want to believe every word in it. But the charges made in it are false. This is another Conservative Witch hunt that went nowhere, and it included touches of racism that scrapegoat Chinese Americans as spies for China.

The key sources for this book have been proven wrong.

Trulock has resigned.

The Times was forced to admit they were wrong about about the article.

After being proven wrong by an 60 minutes investigation, Energy Secretary Bill Richardson, is still in denial of his involvement that got this mess started.

Cox stated that the case against lee was starting to look like Richard Jewel.

Finally, since the case against Dr. Lee fell apart a number of Republician Senators who accused Clinton of treason have become silent and left the matter alone.

This biased book does not plan to do that.

Robert Butler

Dr. Canfireld and Mr. Delgaudio's account of the treasonous actions and illegal campaign funding involving Ex-President Clinton and Ex-Attorney General Janet Reno, are unvarnished and accurate. I had only obtained bits and pieces of information involving Communist Red China's influence over Ex-President Clinton's administration due to the medias liberal spin. However, was horrified by the legitimate threat to our national sovereignty and safety courtesy of Clinton and Reno. The book goes into elaborate detail evidencing how Clinton used his executive power to run interference for the Riady's, and Chung, who contributed heavily to his election in order to receive highly classified American military technology. To just name a few of Clinton's treasonous activities covered in this book are as follows:

l. Evidence of Clinton and Reno's intentional roadblock, obstructing the Cox report from being released which revealed Red China's progress in developing a State-of-the-Art military with nuclear weapons on a par with the U.S.A.

2. Clinton's malicious systematic dismantle of the Reagan Strategic Defense Initiative.

3. Clinton's signing of control waivers allowing transfer of improved missile guidance systems to Red China; although being fully aware that Red China had nuclear-tipped ICBM's targeted at the U.S.A. Then vetoing Republican missile defense legislation.

4. Clinton intentionally loosened export controls on missile technology by moving approvals out of Defense and State departments into the pro-trade Commerce Department - being fully aware that red China could easily obtain this highly sensitive technology.

5. Clinton did not disapprove of North Korea firing missiles into Japanese and Alaskan airspace. And intentionally attempted to conceal Red China firing missiles into Taiwan airspace from the American people.

6. Clinton was opposed to the Theater Missile Defense system which could protect the U.S.A. from Reed China's nuclear missiles. I would recommend this book to anyone who has an interest in understanding the extent that Clinton and Reno have made our country and we as a people vulnerable to foreign aggressors.

This book takes a look at an aspect of politics we usually don't think about---- how the actions of politicians teach children lessons contrary to those taught by most parents. The book presents a well-researched look at various scandals during the Clinton Administration, governmental and media reaction to them, and, most importantly, the subtle messages they sent to children about accountability and truth.

What is truly amazing is that this book was written by a 17 year old high school student. The perspective is one we don't often see. Although my own political posture does not mirror the author's, I must agree with his overall premise. He has made some very thoughtful observations about American values.

The book is easy to read, and I highly recommend it.

This first book by an unusually erudite young intellectual is predictably his initial step in a career of inflicting righteous outrage upon public officials who fail their sworn duties, though this career will likely be part time, since the author's professional goal is in medicine.

From the outset, as I turned the pages of this compendium of outrages during the opprobrium of the Clinton years, I was reminded of numerous mendacities I had forgotten - the mind is very forgiving - but I am thankful that someone kept track. In this case, that someone must have started keeping track at about age eight or so!

The book's setting is a reminder of those values that all parents should imbue in their children, and it seems that the author remembers well how his parents taught those values. Then he reminds us just how the Clintons profaned those values. I found especially interesting his inclusion of consistency (and proper inconsistency, thus escaping the hobgoblin curse) among those values.

And Mr. Fodeman is quite careful about distinguishing between outright crimes committed by the Clintons and those that might be against the law. Sometimes, in fact, I think he tended to be overly forgiving on such knife-edge distinctions.

All in all, and despite some rather insignificant grammatical glitches, this is a very good read, and despite his complaints, he maintains a fine degree of civility. I expect to hear more from this promising young author.

Jason Fodeman demonstrates an unusually keen insight for a 17 year-old in his excellent expose of the Clinton Presidency. With literary precision he details facts surrounding the numerous scandals which characterized the Clintons during the President's two terms. Mr. Fodeman's contrast between the values imparted to him by his parents and grandparents which influence so much of who he is, with the Clinton's values for power, money, exploitation, greed, and lying, is striking. Page after page startles the reader into an awareness of how vulnerable young people could have been influenced so negatively by such powerful and influential people as the Clintons. Mr. Fodeman's style of writing and youhtful insights make this an appealing book for people of all ages who seek to understand the Clinton's influence on our culture.

I happen to agree with Mr. Bugliosi that the Supreme Court made a huge blunder in this case. I agree that postponing Ms. Jones' suit until after the end of Clinton's term would have been the most acceptable route. Clinton (and no other president) would ever be "above the law" with this approach. Paula Jones would still have had her day in court. I rather doubt that she and her handlers would care once Clinton is no longer president. That said, this book is a BIG disappointment. Mr. Bugliosi rambles on for much of the book about totally unrelated topics---girls wearing jeans and navel jewelry come to mind. He even shamelssly promotes his OJ book. He arrogantly promotes himself as the only one who noticed the Court's blunder (some of the rest of us noticed, too). Without the ridiculous diatribes and self promotions, the author would have had a very slim book. I also think that he likes to rant and hear the sound of his own voice.

Bugliosi begins with an irrelevant social commentary.When he gets to the subject,he makes his point well.The Jones v. Clinton decision of the Supreme Court was a tragic mistake,a travesty of justice that has forever altered the balance of power in the three branches of government,and may do untold harm in the future.

Any fair reading of the FERERALIST PAPERS leads one to conclude that the founders could not have intended for a federal district judge to have the power to compel a sitting president to answer a civil suit.Bugliosi uses Fed.69,by Hamilton,to argue that a sitting president could not even be arrested for murder without first being impeached and removed from office.
Bugliosi correctly sketches the true meaning of the case.The Supreme Court now views itself as the "first among equals" and wields the power of judicial review to assert iteslf against the other two branches,with no repect for precedent or original intent.
Bugliosi also takes on the question ignored by Mr. Clinton's lawyers:the need of Mrs. Paula Jones' interests to be balanced against the interests of all other Americans.Even a soldier undergoing basic training enjoys "temporary immunity" from lawsuits,but the President apparently does not.
On the negative side,Bugliosi's writing style is colloquialistic and unfocused.He can sometimes depart from sober analysis and launch into hyperbolic editorialism in the very same sentence.There is too much slang,and too much "tough guy language",and this does not serve to support his thesis in a meaningful way.
I believe that the Rehnquist Court has waged war against the rights of private citizens and against the traditional balance of the separation of powers.Bugliosi argues convincingly that the latter is,at least,the case.This book was written before the Clinton Impeachment.A revised edition is now in order.However,the legal reasoning would be the same.

Aside from the legal precedent established by Paul Jones v. Bill Clinton, Bugliosi is obviously distraught about this and many aspects of our current culture, and the book honestly portrays this raw emotion that is attributable to the fast track publishing offered by this "Library of Contemporary Thought" series. While much of this emotion would have been eased through the traditional and more lengthy editorial process, the core message Vincent Bugliosi provides is a critical analysis of the Supreme Court decision in Paula Jones v. Bill Clinton.

He accurately critizes a decision that apparently was made on a political, rather than legal, basis. In the zealousness with which his critics have been out to "get" Bill Clinton, this decision establishes a dangerous legal precedent -- that a sitting President can be subjected to a civil lawsuit. Bugliosi's principal argument is that for this decision, the Office of the Presidency should have been separated from the person holding the office at any given time. This core message is an important one that was severely neglected by the traditional media, who used to have some sort of "journalistic integrity" that distinguished them from the tabloids.

This argument extends to the entire manner of the Kenneth Starr investigation, and now that his report has been sent to Congress, it will be entirely appropriate to examine his tactics and political motivations. We can only hope that Bugliosi will do so, although without the emotional outbursts that detract from his stellar legal career.

As this review is being written, further disgrace to the Office of the Presidency is being inflicted by Starr and the Congress by their decisions not to allow the President time to review the report before it is made public.

Furthermore, another review of this book "Poorly veiled partisan deceit" is typical of the hypocrisy of Clinton critics. In this highly partisan critique of Bugliosi, the author completely ignores the crux of Bugliosi's argument (as stated above). That this author, the Republican party, and vast portions of the media are disrepectful of the Office of the Presidency is shameful; that the Supreme Court could unanimously be so is a national disgrace.

The book explained little of Air Force One, or how it deals as a flyiny White House. Its a lot of small mittle tales about this guys life for two years.

"Air Force One you are clear for take off." These words are spoken every time the President's plane is about to travel, and I often wonder what happens on that plane. For the first time we have an inside look.

Follow along as the author tells you what it's like to ride along with the most powerful leader in the free world. You travel back to the days when Bill Clinton first approached a white aide for the job.

Sit back and relax as you read about the travel to over 20 countries, over 35 states and countless miles. You read with wonder, awe and maybe a little envy as you hear what the behind the scenes talk.

The author does a great job of detailing the stories, each coming alive and giving this reviewer a glimpse of what it takes to keep the President up to date on the daily happenings. Overall a real easy read.

I have worked on political campaigns professionally for many years and always wondered what it would be like to work for the President. This book opened my eyes beyond the glamour of the West Wing and let me ride along motorcades, helicopters and of course Air Force One. If you are interested in what goes into moving the President and his staff this is the book for you. A great read for any political junkie.