More Pages: Franklin Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100


Useful for Personality Gossip, But Not Serious Students
Commander in Chief
Good Read on the Leadership Behind the War

Franklin book full of false accusations
Entertaining, ...and now I want "The Rest of the Story"There were several stories (good and bad) in the book that, while I knew it possible for them to be true, my mind wanted to force me into disbelief. Fortunately, I have the good luck to know some of the many individuals mentioned in the book, so when I hit some of the stories, I simply picked up the phone and called. Without fail, every one confirmed the story in question! This leads me to believe the remaining stories are just as accurate. (Which I should have anyway, I've also had the honor of knowing Coach Franklin and he is pretty much a solid stand up guy.)
When all is said and done, the book is informative and educational, but it leaves me wanting for one more thing...the rest of "The Story".
Thought Provoking Lessons about LifeSome will read this book and say there is no way that what is written can be true. I truly believe what is said in this book about the Mumme era is a correct accout of what happended. Tony Franklin is a man of character who as his book states is a stand up type person.
Read the book with an open mind. Many will not know the names of the coaches and players mentioned but you can relate many of the lessons taught to your personel life. The things that happened at a division 1 SEC school will boogle your mind.


waste of timeSally Franklin doesn't really tell us how to do it in many cases.
Many of her 50 ways are not telling us much. "to get on with the vet: 4. Take your cat on a visit to meet the vet...this initial meeting will enable you how to assess how your cat adapts to the vet's handling. 5. If the initial meeting goes well, register your cat with the parctice." Ok, and if it doesn't?
Or: "To climb a tree and get down: 1. Now encourage the cat to back down the tree." How, Id' like to know!
"3. If this doesn't work, use a ladder, or seek expert help from your local Fire Station" Well, thanks for the advise.
Better read Karen Pryors Book " Getting started: Clicker Training for Cats"!
Great training tipsRead this book and you will be happy you did!!!
#1 Cat Training Book Ever!!!
this is a great book

Fascinating - True AdventuresSome of the most interesting material discusses the inability of the US, UK, or Soviets to either create or find or support any indigenous resistance groups in Austria. Why? Several reasons, including the inescapable fact that Austrians were not so dissatisfied with the Nazi government, were less courageous than their counterparts in Yugoslavia, and were far more willing to lay low and wait for liberation rather than risk anything at all to hasten it.
The strongest chapters are the early ones, with Lindsay in the mountains of Slovenia, where he participates in the events he discusses. The book becomes noticeably weaker as the war winds down and Lindsay moves to Belgrade and is kept isolated by Tito and is unable to witness much of what he reports on. He does a game job of reconstructing events from other sources, but much of the immediacy and some of the credibility of the early material is lost.
The postwar political struggle for the (now-Italian) city of Trieste is fascinating. Tito coveted the city and its Adriatic access. The Yugoslavs were dogged, single-minded, and happily willing to engage in deceit to seize the city in the postwar settlements. Finally, Lindsay is entirely plausible in presenting the view that only the U.S.'s 1950 intervention in Korea prevented Stalin from attacking and subjugating Yugoslavia in the wake of Tito's break with the Soviet Union.
This is a strong book, not without flaws, but certainly enlightening and useful to scholars of the Balkans and World War II as well as to those who just enjoy a fascinating war adventure.
Well-written, informative
A Preview of 21st Century WarfareWhile I realize that one can not simply substitute the name "Afghanistan" for "Yugoslavia," I wanted to know if one could draw some more general lessons from our past experience - and who better to write about our past experience in such warfare than Franklin Lindsay!
Certainly the American news media is at a loss to explain not only the current dynamics but more significantly what tasks must yet be completed before we can hope for a stable, prosperous and free Afghanistan. By in large, the American media has not been able to get over the significant cultural differences. They simply aren't equipped.
And so I read Lindsay's book looking for far more than a ripping good adventure - and found it! While I can't claim to "understand" what to expect next from Afghanistan next, that is due more to the lack of good information. What I have now is a list of questions I believe critical to the overall success American foreign policy. I have a starting point. I have a framework, and I credit "Beacons in the Night" with helping identify for me the various key dynamics associated with fighting a numerically superior enemy and securing effective control over a large and diverse population.
America look out! The ground we trod has been crossed before. Listen and learn - the pitfalls are huge, but we can indeed succeed. Yugoslavia stands to serve as a beacon toward success - and a stark warning against failure.
What research! What an education! What a great introduction to the topic! What solid and enjoyable writing! This book was everything I'd hoped it would be - and more.
I recommend this book to anyone who wants a glimpse at the light at the end of the current terrorist-tunnel. This book isn't just history - it's an unflinching preview of 21st century warfare. ~Robert


A man of first-rate enemiesFried places on FDR's list a formidable cross-section of American enemies: Father Charles Coughlin, the bombastic radio priest; aviator Charles Lindbergh, who morphed from international hero into Nazi dupe; John Lewis, the labor leader who used people as callously as ashtrays; Al Smith, the first Catholic to run for president who became an ardent opponent of the New Deal; and Louisiana hurricane Huey Long, perhaps the most dangerous and brilliant of the five. How FDR responds to each is based on that individual's strengths and weaknesses. Thus, Lindbergh and Coughlin are marginalized by their own words, Smith and Lewis by their own vanity, and the dynamo Long is co-opted as much as he is battled. FDR's deft approach to each proves impressive.
Unfortunately, the book at times is an apologia for FDR's many excesses and shortcomings. As an example, spurious excuses are offered for horrific civil liberty violations such as the president's indiscriminate use of the FBI wiretaps on domestic foes. In this and many other instances Fried betrays the prejudices of academicians of his era. To such men FDR did no wrong, the facts be damned. Also, in keeping with the style of professors of his background, Fried can't resist showing off his impressive vocabulary. Keep a dictionary handy.
Nonetheless, the book remains eminently readable and brings a unique perspective to an earlier president whose superb political skills often exceeded his discretion and intellectual capacity. Fried is at his acidic best when he directly quotes outrages from Lindbergh and Coughlin, and the book shines when the professor chronicles the seemingly benign but always powerful theatrics of Long and Lewis.
One of the better descriptions of FDR was "a man of first-rate temperament". As Fried proves, FDR had first-rate enemies as well.
An excellent book although I never felt FDR was hindered inFDR, like Lincoln, was loved or hated intensely. There were few people indifferent to them.
With the exception of Lindberg, all of them: Father Coughlin, Huey Long, Al Smith & John Lewis had a love/hate relationship with the president.
In the case of Coughlin, Smith & Lewis, FDR gave them a light touch. They eventually self destructed. They were flawed little demagoges. Long could have really caused some political trouble but was killed early in FDR's presidency.
FDR really seemed intent on bringing Lindberg, already an American icon, down. It was his isolationist views, so persuasive, rather than his Nazi sympathies that concerned the president. When war finally came & Lindberg volunteered, FDR personally intervened & thwarted him.
Some biographers have given Lindberg a pass. They have treaded lightly on his isolationism, his Nazi support & anti semitism. This book is not so kind.
I might never read a biograhy on Coughlin, Smith or Lewis so the information on these three historic figures was valuable to me.
That FDR manipulated The United States into World War II, as the isolationist even today contend, is probably true & the subject of more than a few books. However history exonerates him.
In this case the means truly justifies the ends.
An interesting concept and an equally interesting read.become president had Smith not virtually blackmailed Him into running for Governor of New York in 1928.After the election Smith felt He was due some deference which He never got. But to blame their alienation envy and resentment on Smith's part is I believe wrong. By 1932 Smith had moved to the right in His ideology as many do as they get older. I believe that He genuinely believed FDR was moving America towards Marxism.Huey Long was said to be the only politician that FDR genuinely feared.Against all logic the author believes the Kingfish would not have run for Presidentin 1936. I believe that Long would almost certainly have run and thatHe might have thrown the election to the Republicans. As William Manchester once wrote; ''Huey Long is one of the few men of whom it can truly be said that had He lived history would have been different''.The least impressive of the enemies is Father Charles Coughlin, a windbag in a clerical collar. John L. Lewis was a Labor leader with dictatorial ambitions who clearly underestimated Roosevelt's popularity with the workers. Charles Lindbergh was the only one of the five who was not originally a Roosevelt ally.Lindbergh was enormously naive, I don''t think He was a Nazi.Fried says that all of these men were living in the past and could not understand that Roosevelt's policies were the wave of the future. I don''t think that could truly be said of either Long or Lewis. And it begs the question of wheather the ideas of the future are always superior to the ideas of the past. Nevertheless a good book.


Still one of the best introductions to the New Deal
A Masterful Story by a Master HistorianThough Leuchtenburg's body of work is impressive, this text stands as his single best work. Though it's nearly forty years old, the text is surprisingly lively and the interpretations quite lucid. This is, without doubt, the single best text on FDR or the New Deal. Simply outstanding.
The New Deal and Its MasterAt the start of the book I was expecting this to be a propaganda piece for FDR. While the author seems to view the New Deal with favor, I did find the book to seem to be a rather even handed account of this period of history.
Leuchtenburg begins the book with an analysis of the conditions existing at the beginning of the New Deal. The advancing gloom of 1932 provides the background for the beginning of the story. The progressively desperate measures of the Hoover administration are contrasted with the rising tide of the Roosevelt movement in the Democratic Party. The shadows of despair lengthened in the winter between the November elections and the March inauguration. This section of the book both reinforced and challenged my prior understandings. The fact that the economy deteriorated significantly over the winter was confirmed. My prior readings, presented from President Hoover's point of view, emphasized Roosevelt's unwillingness to endorse any attempts by the administration to deal with the worsening crisis. Rather than illustrating a shallow and indifferent character, Leuchtenburg presents the time as one in which Roosevelt resisted Hoover's attempts to commit the new administration to continue programs favored by the old.
The section on the first 100 days emphasizes the uncritical manner with which the Congress rushed to approve most measures sent to the Hill from the White House. The session of 1934 was another time of accomplishment for the Administration although the front of solidarity began to crack.
The High Tide of the New Deal came with the election of 1936 in which Roosevelt carried all states except Maine and Vermont. In the aftermath of the election, as occurs after so many landslides, Roosevelt over reached his grasp and suffered a major rebuff with the defeat of his court packing bill in 1937. Over this issue, Roosevelt alienated some of his most loyal supporters, including his own vice-president. With that battle, the New Deal had, for the most part, exhausted itself. While domestic challenges remained, the New Deal had run out of answers. The hope of 1933 had given way to a sense of hopelessness as the economy plunged again in 1938. The specter of permanent massive unemployment was seen by more and more as the New Deal initiatives failed to end the depression.
Toward the end of the thirties, the challenges rose on the overseas horizons. Leuchtenburg skillfully narrates the change of focus of the administration from moving the country out of the fear of the depression to one of moving the country to face the dangers looming abroad. Roosevelt's struggles against the strong strain of isolationism are skillfully presented.
There are several things which I learned from this book. The New Deal as a modification to preserve the social order, rather than as a revolution to upend that order is a point well made. The delineation between the steps which Roosevelt would take as opposed to those which he would not consider were interesting. The mention that the main concern of the New Deal was the plight of the farmer came as a surprise to me. I had always thought that it was mainly concerned with industry. The acknowledgment that full employment was not achieved until 1943 says much about the economic effectiveness of the New Deal. I finished the book with a much better understanding of what the New Deal was than I started out with.
As the title indicates, this book is primarily about Franklin Roosevelt. While many other actors in the drama, both within and without the administration, play important roles, the focus is always on Roosevelt. This is proper because, in truth, Roosevelt was the master of the New Deal. The book makes the point that if the gun of Zangara has struck down the Roosevelt, rather than Cermak in Miami, a Gardner administration would have directed history much differently. Truly this was a case in which a great personality did make a great difference.
The treatment of FDR is very good. Stressing his initiatives, which met with both success and failure, Leuchtenburg gives us a view of the influence of Franklin D. Roosevelt on history through his leadership of the New Deal. There is no place in this book for an inquiry into personal lives, so common in modern historical and biographical literature.
This book is an excellent choice for anyone interested in an overview of the New Deal. I would recommend it for teachers at the high school or collegiate level for class assignments, students looking for materials for book reports, or anyone wishing to acquaint himself with a fascinating and influential period in our history. It fulfilled all of the hopes with which I opened the book.


Big GameThis book is about two boys named Joe and Frank Hardy that are on vacation. The local football team had a recent death on the team and nobody knows what happened. The owner talked to Joe and Frank and they decided the help crack the mystery. So the owner hired Frank as the back up punt returner and Joe as a guy up in an office that watches the game. Together they worked and found out who the killer was.
Three things I didn't like about this book are the realism, the lack of action, and the pace of the book. Let's start out with realism, it was lame, like they would really hire a kid on a professional football team and actually play him. Also like they would really have a couple of kids trying to solve a murder mystery. The pace of the book was really slow; it took forever for anything to ever happen. This book really lacked action; it had one good part in the beginning with the kids playing football. Then one in the end with a football game, they let the middle wide open.
I recommend this book to young teenagers that like sports/mystery books. If you don't like sports then this book isn't for you. Overall I thought this book was an ok book.
Football Isn't All FunThe story is ended a little abruptly. It would be better if it told a little bit more about what happened after they solved the case. It was almost like the author got tired of writing and just quickly rapped it up. The story was easy enough to read, the author didn't use big rare words that bore and confuse people. That makes this book an easy and fast read. As far as the plot goes, it is easy to follow and moves at a good pace, so you shouldn't get bored with is. The author uses enough detail so that he leaves some things up to the imagination, but not to little that you're left wondering about the things that need detail to understand.
I would recommend this book to anyone who likes football and mysteries. The Hardy Boys have been around for a long time. So a lot of people out there that like them, so check one out for yourself.
Hardys vs. Murder

A steady progression towards the climax of the seriesKeyes' style is round-robin, and he rotates between characters, chapter by chapter, throughout the book. He is somewhat guilty of blatant cliff-hangerism, but I've learned to enjoy it. His characters are interesting enough that I didn't mind being torn away from one to hear about another.
But without a doubt, his strength is his masterful concoction of cultures that could have been ancestors of our own. His knowledge of native American tribes is evident, and he uses it to greater effect in this volume than in the previous two. My biggest complaint was that _Empire of Unreason_ seemed to end like a movie whose film had run out, which is why it gets only four stars. Certainly, there could've been a grander climax, but the book as a whole stands solidly.
If you've read the first two books in the series, the third is no reason to stop. My favorite still remains _Newton's Cannon_, but this book sets up a fourth (and final, so I hear) book that I eagerly await.
More character development,please
An Intricate Tapestry of EventsIn the first volume, "Newton's Cannon," we find three key players, Isaac Newton, Benjamin Franklin and Adrienne do Montchevreuil enmeshed in the plots and machinations of the English and French kings. This is a titanic struggle over Newton's discovery of Philosopher's Mercury. It ends in the destruction of both countries when Louis XIV managed to aim a comet at London.
In the second volume, "A Calculus of Angels," the world is plunged into a new Dark Age by the cataclysm. Newton and his assistant Franklin flee to Prague, while Adrienne struggles for survival and is drawn to Tsar Peter the Great. Cotton Mather and Blackbeard lead an expedition to the Old World to find out what had happened. Along with them comes a Choctaw shaman, Red Shoes, who will play an increasingly significant part in later volumes.
With most of the players introduced book three, "Empire of Unreason," plays them out on a canvas that focuses on events in the New World. Franklin and Red Shoes lead separate efforts that bring them in direct conflict with the machinations of angels manipulating imperial Russia. These manifest as the appearance of James Stuart (the English Pretender) with an army on the Eastern Coast and the invasion of the Western Coast by Oriental and Russian forces lead by the Sun Child, who is actually de Montchevreuil's son. The plot swirls with complexities as the various characters are drawn into what may become a confrontation in the next volume. Here they fight battles and hunt the creatures of the Malakim (angels) and are hunted in turn. The writing is colorful and there is a never-ending supply of cliffhangers and twists to keep up the reader's interest.
I am reading another alternate history series at the same time, Mary Gentle's Book of Ash. This follows a young woman military commander in a struggle across the face of 15th century Europe. The two series have much in common. The heroes are facing enemies that would eradicate the human race. The primary characters are touched by magical forces that change them permanently. And their struggles are against overwhelming odds.
The series differ in that Ash is true science fiction coupled with superb military history, while the Age of Unreason is a fantasy with the illusion of a scientific basis. Age of Unreason is the more intellectually interesting, since the author takes the time to delve into philosophical and metaphysical ideas. Not in such detail that the narrative is ever the least bit tedious, but there will be times when you put the books down and think over a paragraph.
Both series are exceptional works of author's imagination that I recommend wholeheartedly. Certainly, if you enjoy one of them, you will enjoy the other.


Above Average
A Mexican Adventure With The Hardy BoysThe Hardy Boys, Frank and Joe, along with their dad, Fenton, travel to Mexico to locate a missing witness in oil stock swindle.
Along the way, they rescue a kidnapped Mexican boy and get invited to his father's hacienda, where they meet a mysterious Yaqui Indian who aids them on their quest.
All the threads come together as the Boys and their father are captured by the murderous Vincenzo and his band of cut-throats.
There's plenty of action and adventure here as the Hardy Boys battle their way free and solve the case!
Danger South of the BorderI always wanted to read this book as a kid (something about the name attracted me), but never got around to it. Finally reading it as an adult, I enjoyed being back in the Hardys' presence. Frank and Joe are still able to entertain, although I must admit they couldn't quite mystify as much as they did when I was a kid. Still, their fans will love this adventure with plenty of danger, excitement, and close calls. Not to mention a wonderful escape scene near the end.
These books have captured the imagination of generations of boys for a reason - the adventure. This book will keep readers glued to the page to find out what happens next to their heroes.

Even worse than Larrabee's ignorance is his lack of education -- which, combined with his academic's vanity, deals a serious question mark to his accuracy and perhaps his personal honesty. He resorts to the invalid "argument from authority" or "appealing to the gallery" (choose the fallacy you wish as he seems to rely upon them rather heavily). Again on page 83, after claiming an absolute absense of evidence (and I direct readers to a raft of books on the subject all with plenty of evidence, including Toland, Morgenstern, Beach, and John Denson in addition to Stinnett), he claims that those who claim FDR had foreknowledge of Pearl Harbor are reduced to "arguing that its nonexistence proves the existence of a conspiracy to suppress it. Credo quia absurdum." Not only is this stretching the truth (the part in English), but Larrabee's misquoted and re-constructed Latin phrase is a telling reminder of both his vanity and desperation to impress us with what he wishes were his vast compendium of learning. First of all, the early Christian theologian, Tertullian actually wrote, "Certum est quia impossible est." What I believe happened here is that Larrabee, wishing to pepper his text with something learned beyond the usual phrases such as "modus vivendi," pulled out of his imperfect memory a misquote or else relied upon an inferior source of quotations that was published in English. He then found the phrase, "I believe because it is absurd." This is a commonly encountered mis-translation of Tertullian. But providing the English quote was apparently not sufficient for Larrabee. Wishing to stun us with his vast learning, he attempted to rely upon his (probable) high-school Latin -- which turned out to be a very weak reed indeed -- and made a sorry attempt to do some clumsy Latin composition of his own so that he could use italics lettering in his text. Uh-oh. Mistake. Latin composition requires knowledge, not an amateur or diletante such as Mr. Larrabee. The result? A perceptive reader notices such things and realizes he is dealing with an intellectual lightweight, not a scholar. I wonder if the education institutions with which he was affiliated were ever aware of this streak. If he taught at a university, he must have been insufferable. He certainly isn't among the cognoscenti. Needless to say, things like this cast a pall over the remainder of his book. Ciao!