Amazon.com

This is possibly the single best book available on the Reagan presidency. Lou Cannon began reporting on Ronald Reagan as a journalist when Reagan first ran for governor of California in 1966, and then covered him again in Washington after his 1980 presidential election. In short, there is probably no man or woman who has spent more years writing about the Gipper than Cannon. The result is a magisterial account of Reagan's two terms in the White House. Cannon is broadly sympathetic to his subject, but also coolly detached. President Reagan: The Role of a Lifetime pulled off the remarkable feat of winning praise from both Reagan's admirers and detractors when it was first published in 1991. This reissued edition, which includes a new preface describing Reagan's postpresidential descent into the abyss of Alzheimer's disease, must now be considered the standard text on the subject--especially in light of the controversy surrounding the book that aspired to Cannon's mantle, Edmund Morris's quasi biography Dutch.

Cannon's book is full of wise analysis and sound observation. He explains Reagan's success convincingly: "Optimism was not a trivial or peripheral quality. It was the essential ingredient of an approach to life.... [Reagan] had a knack of converting others to his optimism, almost as if he drew upon some private reservoir of self-esteem. People who listened to Reagan tended to feel good about him and better about themselves." Though the book bursts with detail, it's never so cumbersome that it bogs down Cannon's narrative. And these pages give only cursory attention to Reagan's life before the White House; this is more a biography of President Reagan than of Ronald Reagan. Conservatives who are defensive about Reagan's legacy may bristle at certain points; Cannon's portrait is not always a flattering one. Yet it's a compelling biography of a compelling man's most important years. It's possible to imagine that a fuller biography of Reagan will be written some day. Right now, however, this is the best there is--and it's very, very good. --John J. Miller ... Read more

Reviews (29)

Forget Morris...this is the way a Reagan Biography should be
After being severely disappointed by the work Morris spent a decade working on--I re-read this book. It is very well written, and unbiased account of the Reagan Presidency and Reagan the man. Lou Cannon didn't need to insert himself into the story to make this book work. History will point to this as the definitive Reagan Presidency biography and Morris may be relegated the ash-heap of poor authorship. As a journalist who covered Reagan as governor of California and as President, Cannon has some interesting insights on a complex Presidency.

Inside Ronald Reagan and his White House
The quest to understand the presidency of Ronald Reagan is one best undertaken by someone without a stake in the outcome. This is true of most political figures and it is true of Reagan as well. In general, I dislike books written by sycophants and I can't stand attack books written by partisan political opponents. It is for this reason that Lou Cannon's dense history of the Reagan White House is such a pleasure. Originally written in 1990, the book was revised in 2000. This is good because the ensuing decade lends some historical perspective to Reagan's years in Washington. In 1990, Gorbachev was still running the Soviet Union, nobody knew who Bill Clinton was and the economic expansion of the 90's was well in the future.

Cannon, a veteran journalist spent years covering Reagan and is clearly fascinated by him. The book is not a biography of Reagan. His years prior to 1980 are only briefly touched on. It is a history of Reagan's presidency. As such Canon provides detailed portraits, not just of Reagan but of most of the important players such as James Baker, Mike Deaver, Edwin Meese, Donald Regan, William Casey, Casper Weinberger, George Schultz and others. Reagan is shown to have been neither the detached idiot savant that his detractors like to portray nor the shrewd movement conservative that his loving fans on the political right recall. Reagan was above all a simple man with a good deal of common sense who believed in a few core principals. One of those principals and the key to his presidency was his relentless optimism. At a time when the United States seemed to be running out of gas, when the communism appeared to be here to stay, when Americans were losing hope in their future, Reagan never wavered in his belief that the future was bright and that the Soviet Union was doomed. This "vision" was Reagan's greatest attribute and the reason why he was adored by so much of America in spite of all his other flaws.

Cannon of course documents Reagan's shortcomings, which were considerable. Reagan was unable to even comprehend many of the intricacies of public policy and was thus dependent to a huge extent on his advisors and subordinates. Yet he was curiously unable to effectively manage his cabinet and White House staff. When policy advisors disagreed, Reagan often proved unable to reconcile the differences. And yet raw intelligence or book smarts are not the key to a successful presidency as Jimmy Carter learned. Reagan's dream of a better future, his instinctive fear and hatred of nuclear weapons, his relentless belief in the economic strength of American industry helped drive an administration that tried to put his vision into action as policy.

The scandals are covered as well, in particular the Iran-Contra affair and, as Cannon demonstrates, these scandals were an inevitable outcome of Reagan's remarkably detached management style as subordinates were allowed to run amok. In the final chapter, Cannon concludes that Reagan "may not have been a great president but he was a great American." I agree with this assessment. The ability to manage staff is a key and vital part of being president. Reagan was not the only one to have trouble in this regard. But a key component to greatness is the imagination and vision to see a different and better future. This a trait shared by such diverse figures as Lincoln, both Roosevelts and Churchill. It is sorely lacking in most of our so-called leaders today of both parties. For anyone interested in understanding Ronald Reagan and his eight years in Washington, this book is the standard.

Best Book on Reagan
I have read a 6 books on Reagan and the Reagan presidency for different economics, political science and history classes, and this tome was by far the best. I was absolutely stunned to read that Reagan had described his belief in an invasion of earth by "little green men" to several world leaders, including Gorbachov and Thatcher. Most of the other books were rather boring, but if you are interest in Ronald Reagan, this books is very interesting.

Jimmy Breslin Article Says It Best
This is not Camelot and politically is nothing more than a pile of baloney that never really explores some of Reagans's mistakes as a President from an objective point of view. To have a view contrary to the liberal press coverage of Reagan's funeral and life goes against the grain of the conservative machine. How can they state we have a liberal press... oh that is right Fox, local talk radio, Limbaugh, O'Reilly,Hannity, Reagan, Fox networks etc are fair and balanced!!
Reagan should be on a $3 bill
Jimmy Breslin

June 11, 2004

I offered my small prayer for Ronald Reagan when he was shot by this Hinckley. I said another prayer for him when I read this graceful note that he issued about his Alzheimer's.

Having said this, I now strongly endorse a suitable memorial for him.

Ronald Reagan belongs on a $3-bill.

You are supposed to honor and respect the dead. But you also must respect the truth, and live for the living - and this funeral has gone on for almost a week. I am in a car and I hear the radio announcer, who is supposed to be telling you news, whisper:

"The color guard quietly leaves the casket viewing area and marches with the colors towards the two hearses; they are taking no chances and have a backup ... "

I was waiting for him, or somebody next to him, to let out a sob.

For the funeral of Ronald Reagan, they took the body from Beverly Hills to Simi Valley, the white Los Angeles suburb, where it stayed for a day and a half or so then they drove it in one of these two hearses to the airport and flew it to Washington and then they had a march and afterwards put the casket into the Capitol for crowds to pass by and now there was to be another march and a religous service and then a drive to the airport, where the casket will be shuttled back to the airport south of Los Angeles and in a hearse to the final ceremony at his library on Friday. That is quite a funeral. They buried George Washingon in half the time.

You keep thinking of Harry Truman, whose code was, "Do not impose." He left an order that there were to be no eulogies at his funeral.

This man Reagan was 93 years old and out of it with Alzheimer's for many years and I don't see how anybody can summon grief. They proclaimed it a deep religious ceremony. Which it is not. His whole weeklong funeral is cheap, utterly distasteful American publicity.

The great American news industry, the Pekinese of the Press with so much room and time and nothing to say, compared Reagan to Lincoln and Hamilton, they really did. This is like claiming that the maintenance man wrote the Bill of Rights. And almost all the reporters agreed that Reagan was the man who brought down Russia in the Cold War.

Just saying this is absolutely sinful. The Cold War was won by a long memo written by George Kennan, who worked in the State Department and sent the memo by telegram about the need for a "Policy of Containment" on Russia. Kennan said the contradictions in their system would ruin them. Keep them where they are and they will tear themselves apart. We followed Kennan's policy for over 40 years. The Soviets made it worse on themselves by building a wall in East Berlin. When they had to tear it down and give up their system, Kennan was in Princeton and he sat down to dinner.

I thought that children were taught this. Instead, all week, reporters told us that Ronald Reagan won the Cold War. Beautiful.

Ronald Reagan was an actor. He was as real as the line he used to keep his fame alive. "Win one for the Gipper."

The line was complete Hollywood, down to agents who fought over it.

In 1938, a radio show, "Cavalcade of America," had a segment about coach Knute Rockne of Notre Dame and his star back, George Gipp, who was dying of pneumonia and supposedly said to Rockne, "Someday, when the team's up against it, the breaks are beating the boys, ask them to go in there with all they've got! Win one for the Gipper."

Warner Brothers bought the radio segment and assigned screen writer Robert Buckner to put the "Win one" line into his otherwise original screenplay of "Knute Rockne All American."

Pat O'Brien was Rockne and Reagan was George Gipp. Reagan delivered "Win one for the Gipper" extremely well; he was a lot better actor than he was supposed to be.

When the writers of the radio show saw the movie, they realized that this guy was getting their best line. "Win one ... "

"Where is ours?" they asked. Warner Brothers made a quick settlement and the film was released with Reagan's famous speech.

But for a television release, the line was taken out of the film because Warner didn't want to pay any more. It is back in the video, my friend Harry Haun notes in his book, "The Cinematic Century."

In government, he was as real as his trademark line. He was a callous man with a smile who cut taxes in 1981 and left this city and state without funds for such things as help for dependent children. He proudly hurt the boroughs of this city more than anyone before or after him. If you live in Brooklyn, the record shows that Ronald Reagan hated children. The city and state had to raise taxes to make up for money lost because of Reagan's great conservative movement. Reagan then raised taxes six times. He walked off, leaving us an enormous deficit but with a smile on his face that even the Gipper's fakery couldn't help us with.
Copyright © 2004, Newsday, Inc.

This is still the standard ... justly
In this week's observances of the death and burial of Ronald Reagan, the near-invisibility of his official biographer Edmund Morris is only underscored by the near-ubiquity of Lou Cannon. With Morris's disappointing "Dutch" already gathering dust, a decade of effort wasted, Cannon's "President Reagan: The Role of a Lifetime" is more and more becoming recognized as the best biography yet written of America's fortieth president.

This is as it should be. As Gerald Seib notes in today's Wall Street Journal, Cannon was seen even before the Gipper's election in 1980 as "the journalistic world's foremost authority on Reagan." He was "the only reporter Reagan knew well." In "Role of a Lifetime," Cannon employs this knowledge and access without abusing it. In calling the presidency a "role," Cannon doesn't join the ranks of those who (still) demean Reagan as "just an actor." Instead, he provides a sophisticated look at how Reagan viewed the office: not simply the nation's premier technocrat or legislative whip, but as a position with important symbolic and inspirational functions. After the dismal Carter years, America (and the world) needed a president who understood just what Theodore Roosevelt meant by the office as a "bully pulpit."

In recognizing Reagan's insight -- without either belittling or overpraising it -- Cannon has given himself a solid foundation on which to build a narrative rich in research, story, and understanding. People who come out of this week desiring to know more about this remarkable man and his impact on the world could do much worse than to start by reading Lou Cannon's "Role of a Lifetime." ... Read more

Book Description

Advance Praise

"For twenty years, Ronald Reagan relied upon Dick Wirthlin as his pollster, chief political strategist, and increasingly, as his trusted friend. Dick has waited until now to tell the inside story, but the wait has been more than worth it."
–David Gergen

"A lot of people claim to have been in Reagan’s inner circle; Dick Wirthlin truly was. . . . must-reading for anyone who admired President Reagan."
–Lyn Nofziger

"A must-read for anyone who wants to understand the inner workings of President Reagan’s ability to communicate–and how he accomplished so much."
–Edwin Meese

"Dick Wirthlin was there at the beginning of the Ronald Reagan prairie fire that began with the speech for Barry Goldwater in 1964 and spread across the nation with the election to the presidency in 1980. . . . His recollections are a valuable part of the real history of the Reagan revolution."
–Michael Deaver

"A window into the secrets of Reagan’s success . . . with a level of intimacy and grace that only comes from someone who was there from the beginning to see it from the inside."
–James Carville

"Was anybody more important to the Reagan revolution than Dick Wirthlin?. . . The president trusted him, in fact, thought the world ofhim, as did so many of us who worked with him on three presidential campaigns and in the White House years.He has quite a story to tell."
–Tony Dolan, author of the "Evil Empire" speech

"No one knew and understood Ronald Reagan the leader better than Dick Wirthlin . . . a smart and insightful book, indispensable to understanding Reagan."
–Fred Barnes, executive editor, The Weekly Standard, and cohost, The Beltway Boys, FOX News ... Read more

Book Description

The year's most important biography -- of a leader who still speaks to our times

In the bestselling tradition of Truman, two-time Pulitzer Prize-winning biographer David Herbert Donald offers a new classic in American history and biography -- a masterly account of how one man's extraordinary political acumen steered the Union to victory in the Civil War, and of how his soaring rhetoric gave meaning to that agonizing struggle for nationhood and equality.

Culminating his half-century of study of Lincoln and his times, Donald brilliantly traces Lincoln's rise from humble origins to the pinnacle of the presidency. He reveals the development of the future President's character and shows how Lincoln's enormous capacity for growth enabled one of the least experienced men ever elected to high office to become a giant in the annals of American politics. And he depicts a man who was basically passive by nature, yet ambitious enough to take enormous risks and overcome repeated defeats.

Much more than a political biography, Lincoln seats us behind the desk of a President who, was both a master of ambiguity and expediency and a great moral leader, as he makes the decisions that preserved the Union and shaped modern America. ... Read more

Reviews (65)

Superb account of 16th President
Recently, I picked up David Herbert Donald's biography of Abraham Lincoln for the second time in 4 years. I now realize that I was too young then to appreciate this superb account of the our 16th President. Inspired by a meeting with President Kennedy in whick JFK criticizes historians for judging presidents who must make decisions without the 20/20 hindsight of historians, Donald undertook to write this biography from Lincoln's perspective -- analyzing him and his decisions based upon only what Lincoln knew, believed, and sought to accomplish at the time. We see the great struggles of the mid-1800s completely through his eyes; thus, while Donald doesn't delve into what (I'm sure) are fascinating related subjects, like the details of the great military campaigns or internal Confederate politics, we do gain an insightful look into the life and character of America's greatest president.

I agree with other reviewers that while there is not enough of Lincoln's personal life -- at times I had to remind myself that the man even had kids! -- Donald still skillfully paints a portrait of an amazingly complex man. Fueled by a desire to escape the fate of his uneducated, unambitious father, Lincoln felt driven all of his life to succeed ; he felt pushed forward to a great destiny by God, or the "Doctrine of Neccsity",that was completely out of his control and would lead him safely down life's path. He was an incredibly charming man who could light up a room with his energy, but he also regularly plunged into a deep and dark depression. He was utterly self-confident and knew he was the equal of any man. Intitially a moderate who opposed abolishing slavery in the states, he slowly realized that either slavery would be destroyed, or the Union surely would be.

He was also a master politician. He sensed early on in the 1840s that the nation was on the brink of a new era and that the Whig party had to adapt to the changing times, or die. After his beloved Whig party disintegrated, he helped establish the IL Republican party and, after an unsuccessful run for the Senate in 1858, triumphed over well-known and powerful opponents like William Seward and Salmon Chase to win the presidential nomination and election in 1860. Throughout his political career and his tenure as President he stuck to the center and walked a tightrope between the Conservatives and Radicals in his own party and the Peace Democrats in the other party. While unailingly honest, he understood the political value of ambiguity to cloud facts that he would admit only if forced. Finally, at the dawn of his second term, he had so outmaneuvered all of his opponents in the Congress, in the North, and in the South, that he stood as the unquestioned master of American politics -- not bad for a boy who had grown up in a log cabin with less than a year of formal schooling.

Doanld shows us Lincoln, the man and not merely the statue. Like the rest of us, he was a fallible human being who wasn't always sure that what he was doing was right but sure that he owed it to his country to serve it with honor and dignity in its hour of greatest peril. Donald makes it clear that we owe our country to this man, and one can't put down this book without agreeing.

Just the Facts
The author is a well-respected historian with a brace of books, many of them on politics in the Civil War era. Here he has written what is essentially a political life of Abraham Lincoln, and he shows us Lincoln the politician in great detail. To be sure, Lincoln's early years are here, and his stumbling love life, but to an extraordinary degree Lincoln was an ambitious man who saw that law and politics were to be his path, and he single-mindedly applied himself to becoming a lawyer, and to political work.

There is much of interest in this book, but it lacks the warmth and the narrative felicity that make a chronicle of a life really come alive. Throughout, Donald uses "Lincoln"-never "Abe" or even "Abraham". It's a small thing, but it contributes to the book's impersonal tone. Moreover, he almost never describes Abe Lincoln's feelings, and only occasionally touches on his personal life, such as his relations with Mary, or how he reacted to the deaths of his sons. Lincoln comes to seem a man almost independent of his environment-certainly indifferent to food or comfort, or, we suspect, love-who reserves his real passions for the machinations of politics. However, the author does make credible Lincoln's moral and political greatness; he just does not quite give us a feel for the man. It sounds like Donald's more recent book, "Lincoln at Home", could be the ideal companion volume to this one.

Good Account of A Complex and Interesting Man
Overall, I found Donald's account of Honest Abe to be a good one and I humbly offer what I thought were the good and bad points of this book:

Good:

1. The first couple of chapters describing Lincoln's early life were quite interesting and informative, from the strong relationship with his stepmother to the strained relationship with his father. Reading about his other early struggles and failures further impressed me with Lincoln's persistence and incredible tenacity.
2. Deep level of detail concerning certain points of his life, notably his early law practice, political career, and relationships with cabinet members. If you like this kind of information, then this book is right down your alley!
3. Interesting descriptions of his relationship with certain generals, notably George McClellan (aka "Young Napoleon"). I developed a greater appreciation of the military pressures Lincoln endured during the Civil War.

Bad:

1. The book's length - the text was right at 600 pages and at times proved to be a dry read. While interesting anecdotes were incorporated, the text often seemed to drag on with dry policy decisions. Granted, I am more interested in military affairs as opposed to politics. However, I still believe the book spent too much on the politics and not nearly enough on the military.
2. Personalization of Lincoln - as mentioned in other reviwes, I concur that the reader still misses the essence of Lincoln (What did he experience and how did he really feel about a policy issue or military action? How about more of his relationship with his wife and children?). While the reader is often told things like the incredible number of hours Lincoln put in while in the White House, the essence of Lincoln is left out.

Overall, I do believe the book is a worthwhile read - just be ready to spend plenty of time due to the large content!

Since this is the first comprehensive biography of Lincoln I have read, I cannot honestly compare it to other Lincoln biographers. However, I can say that I have read other biographies (Lee, Grant, etc.) of other famous Americans and I feel like I have gotten to know the person better instead of just knowing ABOUT the person.

Despite this, I still recommend the book.

Long and Often Hard to Keep up But Worth It!
I don't have much time to read as would like to so I read this book when I had time. It is well-crafted book. It offers the best biography of one of my favorite heroes. This book will give a clear view of Lincoln and his political life. Not much is written on his domestic life. For that you need to read the other book by David Herber Donald on Lincoln.

LINCOLN
This is a very good place to start with Abraham Lincoln. However, I wouldn''t make it your only resource.
There are a lot of other great novels such as "We Are Lincoln Men" and a lot more others.
However, this one book covers a lot about Lincoln. ... Read more

Book Description

Not since World War II has Japan faced a crisis like the one before it now. An apparently endless recession has weakened the foundations of the traditional family and severed the bond between Japan's corporations and employees. Unruly children turn classrooms into battlefields. Ultranationalist pride and xenophobia are celebrated in best-selling comic books and championed by media superstars, including the governor of Tokyo. Upheavals across the society have significant ramifications for America. As the Japanese reject their traditions wholesale, they view their half-century-old connection to the United States with mounting skepticism.
Drawing on his fluent Japanese and unmatched intimacy with the culture, John Nathan reveals a nation newly unmoored from the traditions that have shored it up and sometimes stifled it. Dramatic changes in business are augured by Carlos Ghosn, the Brazilian president of Nissan, once scorned as an outsider, now hailed for reviving a moribund giant. The soft-spoken artist Yoshinori Kobayashi foments and reflects rabid nationalism among millions with his hugely popular comic books. Yasuo Tanaka, a puckish writer and bon vivant, wins the governorship of Nagano and revolutionizes Japanese politics with his radical populism.
Nathan delves beyond Japan's celebrities to map the epic shifts in daily life. He unveils the horrors of the Japanese school system. He goes inside a "career transition service" to witness the novel, nuanced rituals of job-hunting Japanese-style. He takes the pulse of ordinary citizens who are caught up in the country's many profound social shifts: agitprop pop culture, emerging feminism, environmentalism, teenage consumerism, entrepreneurship, and more.
With immediacy and élan, John Nathan dispels conventional wisdom about Japan and replaces it with a brilliant vision of a country roiling with pride, uncertainty, creativity, fear, and hope. ... Read more

Reviews (7)

Why so many factual errors
I found this to be an interesting book, possibly more useful to someone not too well acquainted with Japan. BUT how can a book like this be published with so many factual errors? The Princess is not Masaka, but Masako. Nagano is not 100 miles from Tokyo, Tokyo is not the largest city in the world, Takasaki is not 200 miles from Tokyo, Ishihara did not get 319 million votes, etc. If these kind of errors are allowed in a book, how accurate is some of the other information? Rather disappointing.

An eye opener
I liked this book very much. It was an eye opener to me because I had no idea that the school system was in such trouble and that the young people were dropping out of school or becoming violent. This seems pretty bad since Japan has the most rapidly aging society and they expect one day for there to be one worker for every retired person. Pretty depressing.

One thing that was also a surprise was Shintaro Ishihara's response to 9/11. He seems to think that American's are whining. And the Japanese resent the parallels to Pearl Harbor.

I like his references to Japanese authors. I've read many of the books he has translated, especially Oe. So, all in all its worth reading.

Not bad
John Nathan has written an interesting book. In a way, this book shows how academics have lost control of the debate about Japan. It's no longer necessary to be a Harvard Ph.D. (like Nathan) in order to get an insider's view of the Japanese public school system. Nathan's chapter on what he discovered at a mediocre public school on the outskirts of Tokyo will seem like yesterday's news to any young American, Canadian, Australian, etc. who has taught within the confines of the system. Nathan also writes at length about how, in the 1960s, Japanese were shocked by his fluency in their native language. But times have changed, and Japanese today are much more accustomed to non-Japanese possessing at least a degree of proficiency in their language. The book's best chapters (they all deal with different subjects, so you can skip around rather than reading straight from page one to the end) deal with Yasuo Tanaka and Shintaro Ishihara, two writers-turned-politicians. This isn't surprising, since Nathan is a literature expert. The book contains many minor factual errors, but overall it's worth reading. I found it quite balanced and objective, a good antidote to those books that claim Japan is about to sink into the Pacific Ocean.

The best on contemporay Japan
John Nathan speaks about several main social topics of comtemporary Japan. I found the book extremly interesting for foreigners living in Japan and people who are interested in the current situation of Japan. The big advantage of this book, which makes is different from other books about Japan, is that Nathan writes based on a long time knowledge of the country and not from a superficial journalistic viewpoint. A a result, he does not merely selects queer stories and flamboyant Japanese personalities, but outstanding examples of characteristics of modern Japan, which he relates to the historical context. I found many valuable facts, interpretations and opinions in this book that I don't read in Japanese newspapers and books. Nathan is only sometimes openly judgemental his descriptions leaves the reader the freedom to make up his own opinion. After reading the book I do understand much better how to interpret what I encounter in Japan. I also find the writing style good but sometimes challenging for non-english speakers (which is not bad though).

Japan in Transition Again
Japan's history and culture is deeply rooted in its 1400 years of interaction and trade with its Asian neighbors, and especially with China during after the Tang dynasty of 618 to 907. This Asian orientation was the basis and has strongly influenced the development of Japan and contributed to the Japanese "identity". This Asian orientation continued until 1853 when Japan embraced both its past and while simultaneously embarked on a new path to absorb and adopted western or modern technology and culture during the so called Meiji period named after the emperor of that period. This continued until 1945 when its empire crumbled in war. With a fresh start but with its industrial infrastructure and with many government agencies and educational system still somewhat in tact after the war, it entered the second phase of its modern development becoming the world's leading financial power and creditor nation by the late 1980's. But after this financial run up the economy stalled, stocks and real estate prices fell sharply, and Japan entered a decade and half long period of economic stagnation and adjustment.

That brings us to this new 250 page book. The author is a Japanese speaking Harvard educated American scholar with four decades of Japanese experience. He has lived in Japan for many years and is eminently qualified to write the book. The book is short and uses a combination of interviews, personal observations, and references to Japanese writings to provide a sense of a country in transition.

He discusses the issue of the "unique" cultural identity, the politics, youth violence, the modern Japanese corporation in a state of flux, the family, and a number of other subjects. It is clear from the book that Japan is in the midst of another change or renewal. The people are turning again to nationalism, seeking pride in their country, and have a desire to re-establish Japan as a country respected by China and America but working more independently. In the background are lurking many social changes and a breakdown in the school systems, unemployment, changes in the family, and a dramatic increase in youth crime rates - all that are new for Japan that was previously a strongly structured and a more predictable society.

This is a well written book. It manages to be both educate and entertain with many stories, insights, and humor. It brings up to date on what is happening in Japan today in 2004.

Jack in Toronto ... Read more

Amazon.com

Was George Washington a dedicated slaveholder and, like Thomas Jefferson, a father of slave children? Or was he a closeted abolitionist and moralist who abhorred the abuse of African-Americans? In An Imperfect God: George Washington, His Slaves, and the Creation of America Henry Wiencek delves into Washington's papers and new oral history information to assemble a portrait of the first President of the United States that (while uneven in the telling) concludes that Washington supported emancipation by the time of his death.

To begin, Wiencek briefly addresses and dismisses the claim that Washington fathered a child with Venus, (a slave owned by Washingtong's brother, John Augustine). According to Wiencek, the President was likely sterile and such an affair would have been out of character for a man who prided himself on "self-control."

Wiencek's real focus in An Imperfect God is Washington's personal and political position regarding emancipation. The primary ground for Wiencek's argument is Washington's will and a selection of private letters that elaborate a plan for providing land and means for his freed laborers. The will in particular offers powerful evidence of Washington's true intentions, including explicit declarations manumitting Washington's slaves after his death. As Wiencek shows, the document punctuated a long period of equivocation.

An Imperfect God is an imperfect book. Wiencek's occasional first-person accounts of his field research, including discussions with descendants of Washington, feel strangely out of place in what is elsewhere a straightforward biography punctuated with digressions into Washington's larger historical context. Further, Wiencek sometimes dabbles in hagiography and is willing to excuse much in a man who was a slaveholder his entire life. Yet, Wiencek is right to point out the distinctions of Washington among the slaveholding Founding Fathers. Readers can only imagine along with Wiencek the national tragedy that could have been averted had Washington provided the great example of emancipation while in office. --Patrick O'Kelley ... Read more

Reviews (14)

More than just Washington
This book chronicles not only George Washington's personal transformation from unapologetic slave-owner to guilt ridden proto-abolitionist, but also lesser known vignettes about the other founding fathers and black patriots who fought and died to form this country.

The book neither apologizes nor damns Washington. It is balanced and fair in its treatment of the first Prez. At the end it slightly chastized Washington for not freeing his slaves while in office, and the example such an act would have set, yet the author covered his bases enough in the preceding chapters (ie the threat of British reconquest over a dividing America) to show how difficult the issue was Realpolitik-wise. Slavery was evil, and most of the Founders knew it, and they feared for their country because of it.

Unlike Jefferson, Washington wasn't racist, and by the end of the War, Washington was heavily recruiting free blacks. There is no indication that he treated them any less than whites, he visited all the soldiers preceding the daring assault at Yorktown. He personally invited the black poet Phyllis Wheatley to Mount Vernon because he admired her work. These stories are some of the most satisfying elements in the book, after all black patriotism during the Revolutionary War period is disgustinly neglected by most history books and contemporary interpretations of Revolutionary politics. These black soldiers that formed most of the Rhode Island brigade (that saved Washington's life at Bunker Hill), that formed Glover's naval forces, they didn't fight for anachronistic Marxism, or Socialism, or class war, or an Exodus back to Africa, or "Black Power", they fought for the same beautiful principles of individual liberty that Jefferson and the remaining Founding Fathers so hypocritically professed.

Washington, at least, the old General, knew this at the end of his life, and tried to rectify it. By dealing honestly w/ the real issue of slavery and Washington's relationship with it, this book does more to valorize Washington than any whitewashing of the period would have.

Fascinating, not cynical, appraisal of American Patriarch
I received this book as a Christmas gift, and was afraid it might be a cynical and politically-correct portrait of George Washington. Far from it.
Washington was probably the only man who could have steered us between the rock of tyranny and the whirlpool of anarchy. And when his second term was up, "the man who refused to be king" got on his horse and returned to his beloved farm. Mount Vernon, however, was a house divided when it came to dealing with the corrupting institution of slavery. Martha Washington and the extended family had radically different views from the patriarch, who wanted to begin educating the slaves.
It is soul-wrenching to read of the missed opportunities to stymie slavery. The Founding Fathers had the power to bring our way of life into greater consonance with our sublime rhetoric of liberty. If George Washington had freed his slaves while in office, rather than after his death, it would have created an implacable precedent for his successors.
Thomas Jefferson was a genius (George Will called him the "Man of the Millenium"), but it's appropriate that his stock should go down a bit in recent years -- and Founding Fathers such as John Adams and George Washington should be re-discovered and re-treasured. Henry Wiencek has a fascinating section about Phillis Wheatley, poet and slave. The reader can only be stunned by Jefferson's hostility toward her, contrasted with Washington's openness.
The chapter on Williamsburg is superb. Jefferson called the colonial capital "the finest school of manners and morals that ever existed in America." Williamsburg had the first theater in the British colonies. The same royal governor who designed Williamsburg, earlier had laid out Annapolis. The author makes you feel like you're walking the broad expanse of Duke of Gloucester Street and "looking down the vistas of the past."
One learns many things from Henry Wiencek. For instance, President Washington told Secretary of State Randolph that if the Union ever split, "he had made up his mind to remove and be of the Northern [side]." (As the fiery clouds of secession rolled in, and Lincoln tried to convince Robert E. Lee -- married to the Washingtons' great-granddaughter -- to take command of the Northern armies, was either man aware of the Founder's remark?)
The book's frontispiece map of "Washington's Virginia" is the only off-key note. The editors overlooked the fact that Mount Vernon and Alexandria have been magically transplanted from the west bank of the Potomac to the east bank.
I loved this book! I tip my hat to Mr. Wiencek, who penned these words in the acknowledgments: "I close with an old Virginia toast, heartfelt: 'God bless General Washington.'"

An Imperfect God: George Washington, His Slaves, and the Cre
Having won the National Book Critics Circle Award for The Hairstons: An American Family in Black and White, Wiencek here tracks Washington's change in attitude regarding slavery.

Interesting and informative
What changed George Washington from a man willingly breaking up families by participating in the auction of slave children to a man who planned to emancipate his slaves while he was still president? Why would a man using slave labor decide later in life that if the Union split apart into North and South, he would "remove and be of the Northern."?
The book does not sugar coat Washington's involvement in slave holding, but tries to solve the question of what transformed Washington from a slave owner to a man claiming holding slaves was his "only unavoidable subject of regret." We find out why George Washington did not set his slaves free earlier in his life even through he set plans in motion several times to do so.
This is a very informative book, not only concerning Washington, but also the slavery question in general during the colonial period. Enjoyable to read for anyone interested in slavery or Washington.
There are several interesting discussions concerning the author's interviews with descendant's of slaves, along with a short study of how the subject of slavery has been portrayed in Colonial Williamsburg over the years.
The only fault I find with the book is the lengthy discussion of whether or not George Washington fathered a child with a slave woman. The conclusion is that he probably did not, but this part of the book becomes rather slow reading.

Neither a hit-piece nor a whitewash
I expected a politically correct hit-piece on Washington, but was pleasantly surprised by what was a really helpful and honest look at the human being on the dollar. I'm just a high school history teacher in Eastern Kentucky, so I guess I'm not really qualified to judge historical accuracy, but it seemed like a pretty good book to me.

I especially appreciated how Wiencek made Washington's background understandable. One can better understand Washington when you see how far he had to move from his contemporaries--priveleged Virginia slaveowners--to even consider freeing his slaves. His growth and his blindness are both clearly and fairly presented. Washington seems more like a real human being, with good and bad like the rest of us.

As for hagiography, I saw none. I suppose if you are a Washington hater you will be disappointed--likewise if you really think that he never told a lie. But if you want to meet a real human being who, almost alone among his contemporaries, struggled greatly to rise above much (but not all) of their racism, this is a great book. The author's first person accounts were a nice touch for all but those who prefer strict dry-as-dust history writing.

There was much here that will help me to better teach American history. ... Read more

Book Description

After the heartbreaking death of his son Willie, Abraham Lincoln and his family fled the gloom that hung over the White House, moving into a small cottage outside Washington, on the grounds of the Soldiers' Home, a residence for disabled military veterans. In Lincoln's Sanctuary, historian Matthew Pinsker offers a fascinating portrait of Lincoln's stay in this cottage and tells the story of the president's remarkable growth as a national leader and a private man. Lincoln lived at the Soldiers' Home for a quarter of his presidency, and for nearly half of the critical year of 1862, but most Americans (including many scholars) have not heard of the place. Indeed, this is the first volume to specifically connect this early ""summer White House"" to key wartime developments, including the Emancipation Proclamation, the firing of McClellan, the evolution of Lincoln's ""Father Abraham"" image, the election of 1864, and the assassination conspiracy. Through a series of striking vignettes, the reader discovers a more accessible Lincoln, demonstrating what one visitor to the Soldiers' Home described as his remarkable ""elasticity of spirits."" At his secluded cottage, the president complained to his closest aides, recited poetry to his friends, reconnected with his wife and family, conducted secret meetings with his political enemies, and narrowly avoided assassination attempts. Perhaps most important, he forged key friendships that helped renew his flagging spirits. The cottage became a refuge from the pressures of the White House, a place of tranquility where Lincoln could refresh his mind. Based on research in rarely tapped sources, especially the letters and memoirs of people who lived or worked at the Soldiers' Home, Lincoln's Sanctuary offers the unexpected--a completely fresh view of Abraham Lincoln--through the window of a place that helped shape his presidency. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

Something new about Lincoln
This book provides new information about Lincoln and his family, which is highly unusual for someone as researched as Lincoln. Based on letters and recollections of the people who saw him there, this book gives a picture of Lincoln in robe and slippers away from the chaos of the war time White House. A definate addition to what is known about Lincoln.

excellent and timely
This is a well written book and very timely as action is being taken to renovate the Lincoln Cottage. I reside on the grounds of the Soldiers' Home where the cottage is located and know the value of the cottage in our history. The facility is now known as the Armed Forces Retirement Home-Washington. The cottage has always been known as the Anderson Cottage. ... Read more

Book Description

David Frum’s The Right Man gave readers one person’s view of the first year of the Bush White House. THE BUSHES presents the all-important backstory.In an unprecedented account of the family’s path to enormous wealth and to a level of political prominence and power that surpasses that of the Adamses, Roosevelts, and Kennedys, the Schweizers reveal the culture and values that make the Bushes tick.

Drawing on hours of interviews with Bush family members and friends, many of whom spoke on the record for the first time, the authors bring to light the inner workings of a family notorious for jealously guarding its privacy. They present never-before-published details about such sensitive matters as George W’s drinking problem, the family’s business dealings, the sibling rivalry between George and Jeb, and the special assignments George, Sr., and other family members carry out for the President. Their in-depth examination of the family’s approach to public service confirms George W’s and Jeb's insistence that they were never pushed into politics. While the Kennedys and other politically ambitious families are raised to meet specifically articulated expectations (and are punished for failure), the Bushes emphasize the family legacy, inculcating each generation with talk about how important politics is, making political involvement an integral part of the family’s identity. The decision to remain outside the political arena carries with it an unmentioned, but very real, sense of shame.

What distinguishes the Bush family most of all, however, is the lack of a top-down structure. Their free-flowing style resembles the establishment of a “brand,” not a dynasty. Pragmatic and opportunistic, it has not only gotten them where they are today, it ensures that future generation will follow in their footsteps.

Reviews (11)

Well Written and Objective History of the Bush Family
This well-written and meticulously researched book explores several generations of the Bush and Walker families, starting with President George W. Bush's great-grandfather, S.P. Bush. I was as impressed by the authors' detailed and intimate portraits of the Bush family members as I was by their overall balanced portrayals. Although clearly written by admirers of the Bush family - among whom I count myself - this is a no-holds-barred history and nothing of importance is left out. From the family's sometimes problematic foreign business relationships before and during World War II, to the complex and competitive relationships between President Bush, his brother, Governor Jeb Bush, and their father President George H.W. Bush, it is all explored here in great, yet always readable, detail.

The Bush and Walker family business contacts (and admirers) have been incredibly extensive over the generations and have included, among others, the Kennedys, the Harriman's, Eisenhower, Nixon and of course Reagan, as well as an impressive list of world and business leaders from China, the Middle East, Europe and South America. The Bushes have established perhaps the largest network of supporters and financial contributors of any family in American history - rivaling or surpassing anything ever established by either political party itself.

Most fascinating is the authors' exploration of the Walker side of the family. While the Bushes refuse to emphasize the individual over the family, the Walkers are presented as sometimes larger than life, brimming with self-confidence, charisma and the ability - and perhaps the need - to take great, yet calculated, risks. It is easy to see that President George Walker Bush gets more than just his middle name from this side of the family (although, as the authors point out, he also gets more than a little dose of that from his mother Barbara as well).

Also interesting is the fact that numerous male Bush family members (Prescott, George H.W., and George W., among others) have turned not to their fathers but to their uncles and other male relatives for guidance at the beginning of their business and political careers. And, as each succeeding generation has drifted further away from the "elite Eastern establishment," the Bushes have become both more conservative and more open about their deeply held religious beliefs. Each has also married strong woman (Dorothy, Barbara and now Laura) who have melded seamlessly into the Bush family, but who have asserted powerful stabilizing influences over their husbands and children.

Overall, this is a fascinating account of the Bush family. Those looking for a better understanding of what motivates the current President and his family, and how the family got to where it is today, will be richly rewarded. On the other hand, those looking to the Bush family history as a means to bash or criticize this President had best look elsewhere. You'll come away from this book with a deep respect for this highly competitive yet public-minded family.

mildly interesting fluff
The Bushes are a fascinating family, but you only skim the surface in this very soft rundown of the family's history. The most intersting parts of the book come early, where we meet the original Bushes (and Walkers, the current president's grandmother's parents on his father's side). The narrative nicely fills in the history and gives you context for the current and former president's attitudes. There is much to admire about the Bushes, even if you accept that this is a very airbrushed, "authorized" narrative. They are hardworking, loyal and principled (mostly). But they are also untiring resume builders, and you get the distinct sense that the presidency (or any other public office) is something they pursue not to accomplish something so much as to impress the rest of the family (living and dead). Aside from the fluffiness of the analysis (which always seems to put the best spin on anything the Bushes have done), the book peters out about halfway through, when we get to fairly current history. By the time the narrative gets to George H.W.'s vice presidency and presidency, the litany is basicaly a hopping around to mention all the greatest hits of the family history in very cursory fashion (Clinton and Gore literally are mentioned once(!) in the part about the 1992 presidential election). The editing is very sloppy. Some quotes appear more than once in different parts of the book and there are some embarassing misspellings and other minor but annoying mistakes. If you want a history of the Bush clan, this is not a bad palce to start, but for incisive analysis, look elsewhere.

The End of the Dynasty?
Peter and Rochelle Schweizer, the authors of Portrait of a Dynasty, claim to have relied mainly on interviews with friends and family members of the president and his father, the ex-president, for their facts. This is remarkable, because the result, while hardly a brutal attack on the family, is not very complimentary.

George H. W. comes across as an ambitious man who schmoozes his way into jobs, and who works hard, but who has no big goals he wants to accomplish once he gets there. He famously acknowledged that he lacked "the vision thing." He seemed to be absent as a father, but most men were in those days. Still, for a man who claimed to prize loyalty and family above all, it was unforgivable for him to miss George W.'s graduation from Yale. W. was disappointed, according to this book, so it seems even stranger that he would miss his own daughters' graduation, as well.

George W., our current president, comes across as a rude, foul-mouthed, ruthless politician who learned while acting the heavy during his father's administration, that the press was the enemy and that his father wasn't tough enough. His behavior while he was drinking was irresponsible, but after he stopped drinking and found religion, he didn't seem to be any more pleasant to be around. He still mocked people he perceived as being his enemy and was rather strident about his beliefs.

I'll admit that I skipped most of the parts about the generations before George H. W., but the sections on the two presidents, Jeb, and the brothers, make up for the boring spots. The women are glossed over, not because of the authors' bias, but because women are for support in this family. Barbara burst out of that role and upstaged her husband, but it is unlikely that Laura will do anything like that. And the lone sister, Doro, makes no mark at all.

Portrait of a Dynasty is an enjoyable read, and I have only one quibble. There is too much repitition. In one paragraph, Laura is described first as "shy," then as "reluctant,", and finally as "shy and reluctant." Maureen Dowd's on-again, off-again e-mail correspondence with George H. W. is mentioned several times. This sort of thing happens throughout the book. Other than that, I recommend the book to fans and non-fans alike.

Very well written
This very well written and fascinating book is highly recommended -- and it has none of the "warts" and vendetta of Kevin Phillips' "American Dynasty," which pales by comparison and trashed the Bushes at every opportunity.

Obviously the Schweizers benefited enormously from access to the Bush family, and the insights are terrific.

George W. comes off better, in my opinion, than his father. I found it interesting that "Big George" had qualms about running for reelection, and the authors describe in vivid detail how the "fire" to win again had gone out of his belly (pp. 401 & 403).

George W. seems to be cut more from his mother's feisty cloth, which may make the difference in the 2004 election. His rise to the top may not have been conventional, but he may have more staying power than his father did; and historians may treat his presidency better in the years to come.

Perhaps George W.'s wisest decision was Laura. He wanted someone who was "steady and calm" (p. 260), and obviously she changed his life for the better. He is also genuinely religious, and took to heart Billy Graham's teaching that he was "created by God for a reason" (p. 333).

Because of Colu Bush's understandable reticence, it is questionable whether Jeb will ever reach the pinnacle. George P. is still an unknown quantity, and therein may lie the end of the "Dynasty" unless other Bushes emerge onto the national political scene.

Readable, but not formidable.....
The Bushes: Portrait of a Dynasty is a wholly readable, if not entirely engrossing, family biography which seeks to exploit unprecedented access to the broad Bush network of family and friends. Though "breezy" is far too light a term, this effort seems more a 500-page People Magazine article than a scholarly work of heft, analysis, and insight. Coverage of issues and events are largely superficial as the Schweizer's concentrate mainly on the emotive reactions of persons involved. Though this is not unexpected in a biography, momentous events have occured throughout the Bush dynasty. Unfortunately, for those desiring a broader contextual experience, the authors seem content to merely swipe at them and move on.

Those of an anti-Bush stripe will undoubtedly uncover the subtle (and not so subtle) pro-Bush underpinnings of the book, but the pro-Bush contigent may walk away equally dissatisfied as the Schweizer's don't really provide much ideological grist for either mill. The Bushes: Portrait of a Dynasty may affirm positive or negative gut feelings for the reader, but don't look to it to provide scholarly insight, policy analysis, or even moderate discussion of historical context. It provides no practical, encompassing historical vantage point. It's simply not that kind of book. ... Read more

Book Description

A collection of some of the most historic and inspirational addresses by one of the most renowned political leaders of our day.

The most stirring voice to come out of South Africa, Nelson Mandela has brought his message of freedom, equality, and human dignity to the entire world. Now, for the first time, his most eloquent and important speeches are collected in a single volume.

From the eve of his imprisonment to his release 27 years later, from his acceptance of the Nobel Peace Prize to his election as South Africas first black president, these speeches span some of the most pivotal moments of Mandelas life and of his countrys history. And they memorably illustrate his lasting commitment to freedom and reconciliation, democracy and development, culture and diversity, and international peace.

The extraordinary power of this volume is in the moving words and intimate tone of Mandela himself, a living legend and one of the most articulate, courageous, and respected men of our generation. ... Read more

Book Description

Book Description

The classic biography of Hitler that remains, years after its publication, one of the most authoritative and readable accounts of his life. Here in an abridged edition. ... Read more

Reviews (12)

A quick overview of the Nazi Era and Adolf Hitler's life
Having read several books about the Nazis, I was interested in picking this title up for a couple of reasons. First of all, in William L. Shirer's book "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich," Mr. Shirer made a couple of references to Alan Bullock. And second, I couldn't pass up a book written by another of the "Bullock" type (ha ha).

I've got to say this was one of the better written books I've read that concerned the Nazis. He gave detail about the different players in the Nazi Regime (Goring, Goebbels, Himmler, etc) which was nice to finally put some historical information to the infamous people. His vocabulary was sometimes written in simple-man terms, which makes this a good read for people who don't know much about the "Thousand Year Reich."

Another thing Bullock did so well was spanning all of the history of the Third Reich equally throughout the book. Although the ending wasn't quite so extensively written as the beginning or middle, I still felt it was satisfactory.

In conclusion, "Hitler: A Study in Tyranny" is a great book for both beginners that are learning about the Third Reich and people who already know information about the Nazis.

Good in its time now a little dated
The unabridged version was the first major work dealing with Hitler in the English speaking world. As such it was widely read for years and made compulsory for many university students.

Hitler is not that difficult a person to write a biography of. This can be contrasted with figures such as Stalin who was able to control the materials about his life and manufacture a range of untruths. The defeat of Germany and the discrediting of Nazism meant that little was hidden.

Despite that there are some things which have occurred since this book came out which date it a little. Kershaws recent book on Hitler is thus superior simply because of this but Bullocks work is by no means badly dated.

These are to some extent a matter of emphasis but they include.

(a) Hitler seems to have falsified some aspects of his background. He exaggerated his poverty in Mein Kampf which was the source of Bullers material. (b) Hitlers rise to power depended more on the circumstances around him rather than his own actions. Hitler seemed to be rather lazy (c) During his last years Hitler spent most of his time with military personal. They portrayed him as a man who was the archetypal mad dictator. A good deal of this seems to have been made up to shield military leaders from their own actions.

Despite that Bullers work is readable and comprehensive

A Serious Work
Although Bullock is somewhat detached as an orator, there are condemnations of various people/events which seem unnecessary at times - though considering the material it's forgivable. But chapter seven alone made this a great read for me: Bullock, veering a bit from the historical oratory, apologetically proceeds to dissect Hitler's psyche with a surprising depth. It's one chapter worth reading a few times.

Good for starting out
Bullock is one of the most well-known of Hitler's biographers, and that for a reason. The UNABRIDGED version of this book is, however, a much better choice and a more interesting read as well. Compared with others (Kershaw, Fest, Maser, etc) this abridged volume comes up short.

Straight Forward, Comprehensive Study
In "Hitler: A Study in Tyranny," Alan Bullock stated that, as an author, he has no axe to grind. He adhered to that statement. Bullock offered a very balanced and plausible account of Hitler's life atempting to understand the dictator not as a demon but as a human being.

Readers interested in tantalizing controversy will be disappointed with this book. Bullock chose not to assert blame for such things as the Reichstag fire. Bullock dismissed the popular claim that Hitler changed his name from Schicklgruber (man, I got tired of my teachers reiterating that bit of misinformation) and the myth that Hitler resorted to astrology in decision-making. As for Geli Raubel, Bullock finds her best to be left as "a mystery." Bullock took a conservative stance in his analysis focusing only on the known fact's about Hitler's life.

Bullock offers a thorough study of Hitler's days in Vienna before the First World War and the ways in which this experience formed his political views. Hitler is presented not as the originator of future Nazi principles but as a product of the anti-rational, anti-intellectual, and anti-Semetic ideas that had been circulating in Europe for the previous hundred years. His understanding of propaganda, oratory skills, and pratical exposure to street politics helped Hitler gain a following. Ultimately, it was Hitler's determination that prompted him to turn down enticing offers of political position by Franz von Papen and Bruening that were less than what he sought: the Chancellory. During the Second World War, Hitler's "warlord" image was transformed: "the human being disappears, absorbed into the historical figure of the Fuehrer." Bullock also pointed out that this devotion to power led eventually to Hitler's downfall.

Although this book may be a little burdensome for pleasure reading (I doubt I will read it again), it is a very readable biography that would be appropriate for the college student who needs to learn places, events, etc. The lack of an index in this edition does pose a problem when one is trying to find information, however. Another criticism I have is its title "A Study in Tyranny." I was expecting the work to go more into an analysis of Hitler's tyrannical personality and the susceptibility of the German people to it. Maybe I was expecting a little psychology. This book, however, is a straight foward biography with not a lot of interpretation. The works of Ian Kershaw may be consulted if a reader wants more depth. ... Read more

Book Description

Harry S. Truman and Dwight D. Eisenhower worked more closely between 1945 and 1952 than any other two American presidents of the twentieth century. They were partners in changing America's role in the world and in responding to the challenge of a Soviet Europe, yet they are remembered more for the acrimony that ended their friendship. Both were men of character, intelligence, and principle, and as the nation learned in the 1950s, they could also hold a grudge.

Drawing on letters, diaries, and interviews with close associates, this is the first examination of the warm friendship, bitter rupture, and eventual reconciliation between two remarkable Americans. From the author of The Eisenhowers: Reluctant Dynasty and Dark Horse comes a unique volume focusing exclusively on the relationship between Dwight D. Eisenhower and Harry S. Truman.

Harry and "Ike" grew up 150 miles apart in the heart of America. They met during World War II, when Truman became commander-in-chief after FDR's death. Together they would oversee not only the great Allied victory but also the restructuring of the U.S. military and the reconstruction of Europe. Together they would forge history's most successful alliance, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

Their initial relationship was so respectful and warm that Truman offered to step aside in the 1948 presidential election if Ike would agree to run on the Democratic ticket. Preferring to remain out of politics, Eisenhower declined and instead became president of Columbia Uni-versity. Truman helped make Ike a wealthy man by granting him a special tax break for his memoirs. Eisenhower later prepared to remove himself from contention for the presidency in 1952 if Robert A. Taft supported Truman on NATO. But Ike's friendship with Truman would not survive the 1952 presidential campaign, and for nearly a decade the former allies were engaged in an epic feud. It was not until the funeral of John F. Kennedy that the two men put aside their differences and reestablished a semblance of their previous bond.

In exploring the complexity of character, intelligence, and principle, Neal provides a fresh perspective on two giants of the twentieth century, and on the American presidency. ... Read more

Reviews (6)

Flawed premise, but brilliant history
Steve Neal's historical biography "Harry and Ike" nearly fails right from the start by building on a premise that is non-existent: the 'close' relationship between Harry Truman and Dwight Eisenhower. It's well known that Harry Truman and Dwight Eisenhower were never close working partners, even prior to the epic, decade-long feud that began during the 1952 election. It's a stretch to building a book on the premise of such a partnership and Neal does very little support his theory. Harry and Ike were two men who initially had great respect for each other and occasionally worked together on issues of common interest, but otherwise had little to do with one another. The failure to make a case otherwise should have torpedoed this book. What saves it, however, is that, even with the flawed premise, it is a fascinating historical record.

While Neal is unable support his premise, he does an excellent job and revealing the histories and backgrounds of these titans among men. He tracks their lives and developments independently until their disparate paths crossed during the last, mad days of World War II. From there, Neal uses the framework of this supposed friendship to provide informative and interesting accounts of history as it happened during that era. He covers moments like Truman offering to step aside and run as Eisenhower's Vice President in 1948 if Ike were to run as a Democrat (possibly the foundation of Neal's assertion of a 'close' relationship). He covers the major events like the hostile 1952 Presidential election, the beginning of the Korean War, and firing of General Douglas MacArthur. Neal uses these events to show the impact it had on each man and the reactions it prompted.

"Harry and Ike" serves as a good primer for studying the historical events of that time. It has the effect of making the reader want to probe deeper into those events. Reading this book led me to seek out and read the incredible Douglas MacArthur biography "American Caesar". Given that strong historical narrative of "Harry and Ike", Steve Neal should not be penalized too much for his flimsy premise. There's no doubting that it still serves as an effective historical record.

Finally, a satisfactory explaination
Harry was wild about Ike, until Ike gave him hell, sending Harry on a crusade in Illinois. I have read a dozen or so books by and about Harry and Ike, none of which adequately explained the root causes of their falling out or their eventual reconciliation. This book fills that gap. Ike was politically naive, as Harry feared. I agree with the author that Ike would have been a better President if he had followed the advice of more of his friends, including HST, and less advice from his political handlers. This is an excellent book.

Another buddies in history book. We have Napoleon &
Hitler, Hitler & Stalin, FDR & Stalin, FDR & Truman among others.
Some with no connection. Obviously Naploeon didn't know Hitler. I'm kinder that most reviewers. But this was cooperation, not a partnership. The author strains for similarities. They were both poor boys growing up at the same time in mid-America 200 miles apart.
Childish & paranoid come to mind in decribing their relationship after Ike decides to run in 1952. Truman's problem was he idolized generals such as Pershing, Marshall, MacArthur & Eisenhower. He would have stepped aside for MacArthur or Ike if either had wanted to run as a Democrat in 1948. Then he became paranoid that Ike might take him up on it. Ike said he wouldn't run & Truman thought that meant forever. When Ike did run as a Republican to deny Robert Taft the nomination Truman felt betrayed, even though Ike was doing him a favor. He attacked Ike & his character viciously. Of course Ike responded in kind. There were other issues mostly personal. Their foreign policy was seamless from one administration to the next. They basically ignored each other until Kennedy's funeral when they had to sit next to each other. Good history of two great Americans leaders 1945-52 & slightly tarnishing their image after that.

Very light reading about two powerful men.
I had hoped this would be an in-depth exploration of
the inner workings and motivations of Presidents Truman
and "Ike" -what I discovered was a poorly researched, boring
book. It's almost as if Mr. Neal assumed putting both
names on the book's cover would make it a seller. Buyer
beware. You can find more in-depth material on these
men and their times right here on the internet. Also,
it turns out, Mr. Neal received monies from a Truman
Foundation, which is a poor ethical choice on his part, in
presenting a history that the reader assumes is unbiased.
If you like to see pictures of "Harry & Ike" -many which
have been printed elsewhere, you may enjoy "Harry & Ike"
the book. Quite a letdown as to what I expected.

New Information
Steve Neal presents new information from recently released primary source material and demonstrates the ability, integrity and patriotism of Presidents Truman and Eisenhower despite their differences. Few people are aware of their reconciliation, not unlike that of Presidents Adams and Jefferson also mentioned by another reviewer in these columns.
One example of a little gem in the book describes President Truman's anger at Senator John Sparkman, the 1952 Democratic vice-presidential candidate, during that campaign. This volume has many well documented anecdotes that have not been told before and Steve Neal has both an ear and a voice for politics that few possess.
As an individual who has spent most of his life involved in politics and public affairs I found this a fascinating, informative and enjoyable read. My wife and I have chosen to send it as a Christmas/Hanukkah gift this year because of its originality and intelligibility. ... Read more

Amazon.com

The product of six interviews conducted by Russian journalists (and translated into English by Catherine A. Fitzpatrick), First Person is a book-length Q&A session in which Russian president Vladimir Putin discusses his childhood, his life as a spy, and his surprisingly rapid rise as a politician in the 1990s. Parts of this unusual autobiography are plainly banal (he weighs 165 pounds and likes beer), but interspersed throughout are candid comments by one of the world's most powerful men. Putin admits that he didn't know much about Stalin's violent purges in the 1930s when he joined the KGB ("I was a pure and utterly successful product of Soviet patriotic education"). He also scolds Soviet leaders for the invasions of Hungary and Czechoslovakia during the cold war: "These were major mistakes. And the Russophobia that we see in Eastern Europe today is the fruit of those mistakes." At another point, he expresses frustration with some of the things critics have said about him: "Why have they made up so much about me? It's complete nonsense!" On the war in Chechnya, he is predictably defensive: "I was convinced that if we didn't stop the extremists right away, we'd be facing a second Yugoslavia on the entire territory of the Russian Federation--the Yugoslavization of Russia.... We are not attacking. We are defending ourselves." There's also an interview with his wife, who, when asked if her husband ever gets drunk, responds: "There hasn't been any of that." (After Yeltsin, this is apparently of concern to Russians.) The interviewers also ask her whether he ever looks at other women. She replies with a question of her own, intriguingly: "Well, what sort of man would he be, if he weren't attracted by beautiful women?" But Putin is, appropriately, the main show. Readers interested in Russian politics will want to review the final pages closely, as the president discourses on contemporary topics. Confronted with tough questions about Russia's treatment of a journalist who filed negative stories about Chechnya, Putin says, "We interpret freedom of expression in different ways." That's a KGB man talking--and yet another reason Putin is worth watching. --John J. Miller ... Read more

Reviews (16)

Great biography of Russia's president
Vladimir Putin's "First Person" is a biography in question and answer format. It gives a great insight into the man who is the leader of the largest country in the world. There are questions and answers from not only Putin himself, but also his old school teachers, KGB collegues and his wife and two daughters. Even so, this biography does not give a 'full picture' of the president as a person and much of his past (for example KGB) is not mentioned in great detail (that's why I took off a star) and does not give a deep insight as the book implies. This aside, and all considered, this is a good read and a good introduction to Pres. Putin.

A new Czar for a free Ruddia
Once upon a time, there was a belief in America that anyone could rise from the humblest of beginnings -- such as Abraham Lincoln, born in a cabin he built with his own hands -- to become President.

In Russia, without political opinion polls, focus groups or special interest funding, Vladimir Putin rose from a rat-infested cold water apartment to become President of his nation. This book is about a man who spent his professional life assessing people and situations, and thus is not afraid to make tough decisions. In Russia, for the immediate future, tough decisions are needed.

Putin's hero, Czar Peter the Great, used his regal power to make Russia a great, rich and powerful nation. Putin intends to provide similar dynamic leadership with democratic principles. An example may be Singapore, a mix of authority, discipline and prosperity.

The question-and-answer format of this book is based on six four-hour interviews by three journalists. Putin admits he was, ". . . a pure and utterly successful product of Soviet patriotic education." He was smart, dedicated, hard-working and very good in his chosen career with the KGB. He wasn't a old cloak-and-dagger "sneak and peek" spy; he spent his time reading reports, assessing East German officials and skillfully pushing paper.

Trained as a lawyer, he was appalled at how Communist officials assumed they were the law simply because they were Party members. Putin was never a dissident, he was the ultimate Organization Man whose goal was a richer, happier, stronger and freer Russia. He worked hard to become an insider, and as such saw the total incompetence of the Party.

His wife says, "He always lived for the sake of something. There are some people who work hard for money, but he works hard for ideas." When first married, they had a 10-foot by 12-foot room in his parents' 275-square foot apartment. Try and think of any American president since Lincoln -- another idea man -- who lived in any similar conditions.

Like Lincoln, whose greatest idea was "to preserve the Union," the prime challenge for Putin is to preserve Russia. His practical experience taught him that a free market economy is far superior to the