Book Description
Architect Preston Scott Cohen combines the use of the most advanced digital modeling technologies with a fascination for 17th century descriptive geometry. He uses familiar forms distorted by oblique projections and similar devices to create complex designs that challenge our preconceptions about the nature of order in architecture.?
Contested Symmetries and Other Predicaments in Architecture features Cohen's intricate abstract geometries and lucidly describes both the mechanics and the theory behind their application. A wealth of projects, including the widely acclaimed Torus House, are represented through drawings, models, and computer-generated images.
Book Description
From the best-selling author of
A Vast Conspiracy and
The Run of His Life comes
Too Close to Call--the definitive story of the Bush-Gore presidential recount. A political and legal analyst of unparalleled journalistic skill, Jeffrey Toobin is the ideal writer to distill the events of the thirty-six anxiety-filled days that culminated in one of the most stunning Supreme Court decisions in history.
Packed with news-making disclosures and written with the drive of a legal thriller,
Too Close to Call takes us inside James Baker's private jet, through the locked gates to Al Gore's mansion, behind the covered-up windows of Katherine Harris's office, and even into the secret conference room of the United States Supreme Court. As the scene shifts from Washington to Austin and into the remote corners of the enduringly strange Sunshine State, Toobin's book will transform what you thought you knew about the most extraordinary political drama in American history.
The Florida recount unfolded in a kaleidoscopic maze of bizarre concepts (chads, pregnant and otherwise), unfamiliar people in critically important positions (the Florida Supreme Court), and familiar people in surprising new places (the Miami relatives of Elián González, in a previously undisclosed role in this melodrama). With the rich characterization that is his trademark, Toobin portrays the prominent strategists who masterminded the campaigns--the Daleys and the Roves--and also the lesser-known but influential players who pulled the strings, as well as the judges and justices whose decisions determined the final outcome. Toobin gives both camps a treatment they have not yet received--remarkably evenhanded, nonpartisan, and entirely new.
The post-election period posed a challenge to even the most zealous news junkie: how to keep up with what was happening and sort out the important from the trivial. Jeffrey Toobin has now done this--and then some. With clarity, insight, humor, and a deep understanding of the law, he deconstructs the events, the players, and the often Byzantine intricacies of our judicial system. A remarkable account of one of the most significant periods in our country's history,
Too Close to Call is endlessly surprising, frequently poignant, and wholly addictive.
Download Description
The bestselling author of The Run of His Life and A Vast Conspiracy turns his incomparable journalistic insight to the biggest news event of 2000 and distills the complex Bush-Gore postelection drama into a definitive and completely engrossing narrative.
Customer Reviews:
not a bad work of fiction.......2006-03-25
too bad that such an important subject was handled in such a biased way. even worse is that the facts were either only particaly used or twisted to fit the point mr. toobin was trying to make at the time. everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts. this book should classified as fiction and not non-fiction.
A good read, if a bit biased.......2005-03-18
Jeff Toobin is a good writer - I enjoyed reading this book, just as I enjoyed his other book on the O.J. Simpson trial.
"Too Close To Call" is very Gore-centric, however, perhaps because Toobin himself is a Democrat and has made no secret of the fact that he thinks Al Gore should have won the 2000 election. But his bias doesn't distract too much from the interesting tidbits he provides about the campaigns, both before and after election day.
I do recommend this book to anyone who has an interest in the historic 2000 election fight, but be aware that Toobin is far from an impartial commentator.
The liberal bias is made somewhat less annoying by the fact that Bush ran away with Florida in 2004, winning the state easily.
One More Tired Election Book....Another Gore Whine..........2005-03-08
I've never cared for Jeffrey Toobin's commentary on CNN. (I did recommend - in place of this book - Jeff Greenfield's, "One Order of Crow"). His obvious bias detract from a man who is articulate and handsome enough to attract attention.
This is another 'the Republicans stole the election' tome - and a wasted one at that. I wish to make a few points to those who have argued (like Toobin's book) that the election was somehow 'stolen' or people were 'disenfranchised.'
1. Gore did not lose the election because he lost Florida; he lost it because he failed to carry his home state of Tennessee (Jeff Greenfield is one of the few to honestly point this out).
2. The butterfly ballot DID confuse people. However, it was approved by a DEMOCRAT named Theresa LePore and published in the papers the Sunday before the election. How this is the Republicans' fault is beyond my ability to comprehend.
3. Judge Sauls is a registered DEMOCRAT - and even Sauls saw the insanity in allowing selective recounts in only Democratic counties. Had Gore applied to a statewide recount as opposed to an obvious vote search recount, people would have taken it much better.
4. Katherine Harris was unquestionably in Bush's corner. But there is no evidence Harris did anything with the votes except certify them which was her job. That was even delayed by several days - so what's the problem?
5. The Supreme Court did NOT give Bush the election by a 5-4 count; they ruled SEVEN TO TWO that selective recounts violated the equal protection clause of the constitution. The 5-4 vote concerned the REMEDY NOT the violation of the law.
6. Why does nobody mention that Bush had NOTHING to do with the make-up of the Supreme Court? Gore had voted to confirm Scalia, Kennedy, and Souter, and his boss appointed Ginsburg and Breyer. Gore had also voted against Thomas. It seems that Gore had more personal involvement with the Court than Bush could have ever dreamed. Yes, Bush's father appointed two of them - but unless you wish to argue that Bush 41 knew his son would need the Supreme Court to be President years later, that is irrelevant.
Toobin's book was slightly entertaining, so I give it three stars. But Greenfield's takes you there in as unbiased a manner possible.
Overgrown New Yorker Article, Lucid About The Election.......2004-06-01
Written by probably America's most well-known media legal analyst, Jeffrey Toobin takes on the Floridian debacle of 2000 in his short book "Too Close to Call."
What it lacks in legal heft it makes up with journalistic breeze, with Toobin writing in the same lucid tone that he takes in the New Yorker, describing set pieces between Bush and Gore staffers not quite equally, but close enough. Perhaps Toobin is biased in his conclusions that Gore was jobbed, and this is where he may have wanted to shed some light on his own political views, ahem -- Democrat -- and this would clearly have strengthened his case. But after all is said and done, the guy lays enough foundation to support his theory that the Republicans were too ruthless and Al Gore was too spineless.
"Too Close to Call" never describes evidence of out-and-out fraud, but presents the conclusion that it sure would have been nice if the great State of Florida would have taken the time and just truly recounted all the votes, and points out matter-of-factly that in this scenario, Gore most likely would have won. Whether or not you're a Democrat or Republican, the idea that democracy itself was circumvented in this case is extremely troubling, and that's the pitch-perfect note Toobin leaves the reader with.
Surpisingly from a "legal" analyst, this book lacks strong legal analysis, or any legal background at all. There's hardly any references to appropriate statutes, case background, etc., that would really be advantageous for the discerning academic reader who wants to read something more substantive than an overgrown New Yorker article.
But as a huge fan of the New Yorker, such an article draws no real complaints here.
READ 'EM ALL AND LEARN HOW G.W. BUSH IS NOT REALLY OUR PRES........2004-03-25
Read all the election 2000 recount books and thus learn how G.W. Bush is not really our authentic president, rather an "illegal" or "alien" resident of the White House.
Toobin, as usual, is a great writer who tackles great subjects like the election 2000 re-count -- which the USSC on a five to four vote halted the re-count -- thus committing a non-violent coupe of the presidentcy and thus our country.
READ THIS BOOK!!!!!!!
Amazon.com
Washington Times reporter Bill Sammon makes it clear in the opening pages of At Any Cost that he's not a big fan of Al Gore. In this fast-paced account of what happened to Florida's controversial vote, he explains how a defeated Gore desperately fought to turn things around. He starts by suggesting that tens of thousands of voters in the Florida Panhandle--Republican country--decided not to cast ballots when the media wrongly called the state for Gore early in the evening on Election Day, before all the polls had closed in the western part of the state. Without this blunder--which hasn't received nearly the attention heaped on the media for prematurely calling the election for George W. Bush several hours later--Sammon believes Gore would have given up his post-election campaign much sooner. Sammon also believes this had repercussions outside Florida: "If not for the networks' early and erroneous projections, Bush might have easily won the popular vote, and carried a few congressional seats with him."
The bulk of the book zeros in on Gore and his goal of "seizing the presidency." In one nifty bit of reporting, Sammon tracks down a navy lieutenant whose military ballot Gore's lawyers were determined to throw out. Sammon describes the unseemly spectacle of their success:
When the [Duval County] canvassing board announced that the ballots of 149 soldiers, sailors, and airmen had been disqualified, a pair of jubilant Gore lawyers exchanged high-fives. A Republican, visibly shaken by this sight, demanded to know how they could celebrate the disenfranchisement of U.S. military members risking their lives around the world. One of the Gore lawyers glibly replied, "A win's a win."
Sammon also covers all that business about the chads, Gore's "smear campaign" against Secretary of State Katherine Harris, and the Supreme Court's controversial Bush v. Gore ruling. This is by no means the definitive story of what happened in Florida, but it's a useful piece of journalism--and one that Bush's supporters will read with that heady mixture of outrage and excitement that politics uniquely provides. --John J. Miller
Book Description
An inside story of exactly how Al Gore dragged a one-day presidential election into a five-week ordeal and nearly pulled off the largest act of political larceny ever in American politics.
Customer Reviews:
Another great book by Bill Sammon.......2007-10-05
Bill Sammon's books although completely factual read like political thrillers. I loved 'Strategery' and 'Misunderestimated' for this same reason.
'At Any Cost', is another behind the scenes type book about the Bush v. Gore fiasco in Florida. One glaring reality in the book is that democrats are incapable of punching a hole through a piece of cardboard. Do we really want these people making decisions about the presidency?
Sammon wonderfuly lays out the play and counter play of the opposing attorneys. As always he makes it impossible not to like Bush and his administration.
This is the event that reduced Al Gore to the doomsday-preaching imbecile and Hollywood suckup we see today.
Gore's other running mate........2007-07-07
Another important note in this sordid history is that Al Gore enlisted the support of Jesse Jackson as a surrogate at presidential campaign rallies across the country; all expenses paid, without having to expose himself to media scrutiny.[1]
The strategy was to paint Bush as a racist and it was a huge success. In all, Jackson gave more than 150 speeches across the country and the Democratic National Committee funneled more than $450,000 to Jackson's "Keep Hope Alive" political action committee as reimbursement for "travel expenses" that had already been paid.[2] Imagine the public outrage if the National Rifle Association went in a corporate jet paid for by RNC soft money to campaign on behalf of G.W Bush.
Before the vote had even been tallied, Gore anticipated his loss and decided to contest the outcome and, following a script provide by Gore's media handlers,[3] Jackson focused on Haitian-American's who were allegedly denied assistance "and" other African-Americans he claimed were held at roadblocks across Florida and otherwise denied access to voting machines. [4] Isn't it odd that, to this day, not a single civil rights lawsuit has ever been filed from among the hundreds of complaints alleged by the Gore/Jackson team? How is it possible that an African-American wouldn't file a lawsuit? There were no individual complainants, only faceless phantoms brought to life to stir racial hatred and it has been reported that it convinced many Republican voters in the west to change their votes when the terrible news was broadcast.
In the final analysis, Yale University scholar, John R. Lott, found that the reality was just the opposite. "If spoiled ballots do indicate disenfranchisement, then the new data show that, by a dramatic margin, the group most victimized in the Florida voting was African-American Republicans," Lott wrote. In fact, black Republicans were "in excess of 50 times more likely than the average African-American to have had a ballot declared invalid." This, due to the ridiculous "hanging chad" debacle.
The Democratic Party's performance in that election and the 2004 election were not so much a DNC monster as liberal media horsepower. For reasons debated across the board, the major [sometimes called "elite"] media support liberal candidates by an 8 to 10 ratio by the most recent polls. Anyone interested in reading this book will be savvy enough to understand why this is true. It might be of interest to know that the military is nearly 95% conservative but are not allowed to campaign or even discuss politics due to potential conflict of interest. Can you see how easy it is for the young military service member to be influenced by the powerful personalities in the media?
There was a Senator, years ago, called Joseph McCarthy who ruined the lives of many artists, including some in the media, until common sense was restored. What are we to do when the media is the monster driving our politic, society, culture and the direction of our children?
1. Complaint to Federal Election Commission chairman Danny McDonald, 13 March 2001.
2. ACU complaint.
3. Jackson Media Availability on Florida Election Recount," Washington Transcript Service, 9 November 2000.
4. Information from the work "Shakedown" Kenneth R. Timmerman.
Pointless drivel........2007-04-13
Extreme boredom compelled me to start reading this book - profound boredom compelled me stop. Bill Sammon blabs on endlessly at a grade-school level about nothing in particular, occasionally detouring to drop a fishy-sounding factoid on the reader before rambling on again. Though I could not bring myself finish this book, I can't imagine there being a point to all this - especially since history has revealed Gore actually should have won the election, having gotten more VOTES. I'm surprised this is still in print.
"Gore won that election"????? .......2005-09-23
Gore did in fact win the popular vote, the same popular vote that Bush won over Kerry in 2004 which some democrats said didn't mean anything. But Bush won the electoral college vote and won over 32 states to Gore. Al Gore couldn't even carry his own state.
In 2004, Gore couldn't even win a place on the democrat ticket, turned his back on his friend Joe Lieberman and endorsed that nutcase Howard Dean only because Dean was at that time the front runner and Gore no doubt expected Dean to reciprocate by asking him to be his running mate.
As I see it, in every event, Gore is a loser. In fact I even dedicated a song on my local radio station to Gore in 2000 and did the same for Kerry in 2004. The song was an old Beatles song called "I'm A Loser." Sure fits doesn't it?
Worth re-reading again and again!.......2005-08-30
A lot of times when I am waiting for my new batch of books to come in, I'll re-read an old one. I did just that with At Any Cost and it made my blood boil all over again.
When will the democrats ever run a clean campaign? Although this election was nearly five years ago, the furor still lives on. Al Gore and his band of democrat thieves tried to pull every dirty trick in the book to win. Unfortunately for Al, but fortunately for Americans, it didn't work.
What dirty trick? From throwing out military votes to getting the major networks to pre-call an early win for Gore and discourage voters from even going to the booths (kinda of like the fake exit polls we saw in 2004 on election day) to bringing up things in Bush's past from 25 years before just 3 days before the election, clearly this band of thieves would go as low as possible to win. Then acted like a bunch of crybabies when they lost.
In looking back and even when talking to other democrats, it's interesting that now, after seeing the real Al Gore, even those who voted for Gore are glad he lost.
This man is no gentleman. Who used his sisters death from cancer as a means of exploitation to speak against tobacco use in one campaign and then when speaking in North Carolina some time later, bragged about how he picked up tobacco as a child. Clearly this is a man who will do and say anything to get a vote.
His carrying on post election and acting like a spoiled kid. Screething and yelling reminiscent of Teddy Kennedy. His support for Howard Dean when he was the front runner shows clearly that Al Gore has poor taste and lousy judgement. Who would have wanted this jerk (Gore or Dean)as our President?
If you haven't already read this book I highly recommend it. Also recommend the 100 People Who Are Screwing Up America. Gore and Dean justifiably both made the list, in fact the top 20. I also recommend Prince Albert: The Life and Lies of Al Gore. This man is no saint. He would have made a horrible president. Thank God Americans voted for the right man for the right job at the right time....GEORGE W. BUSH!
Book Description
An esteemed historian offers a compelling re-thinking of the path America has taken toward its goal of universal suffrage.
Most Americans take for granted their right to vote, whether they choose to exercise it or not. But the history of suffrage in the U.S. is, in fact,the story of a struggle to achieve this right by our society's marginalized groups. In The Right to Vote, Duke historian Alexander Keyssar explores the evolution of suffrage over the course of the nation's history. Examining the many features of the history of the right to vote in the U.S.-class, ethnicity, race, gender, religion, and age-the book explores the conditions under which American democracy has expanded and contracted over the years.
Keyssar presents convincing evidence that the history of the right to vote has not been one of a steady history of expansion and increasing inclusion, noting that voting rights contracted substantially in the U.S. between 1850 and 1920. Keyssar also presents a controversial thesis: that the primary factor promoting the expansion of the suffrage has been war and the primary factors promoting contraction or delaying expansion have been class tension and class conflict.
Customer Reviews:
Unfolding of the right to vote in the U.S........2006-11-05
In my forty years of studying the history of the U.S., I find this work to be the most authoritative and complete work yet encountered. Not only is the book a thorough guide through the evolution of our democracy, it is an entertaining read. The book is a 'must' read for those who seek a perspective on many of the current issues involving voting rights.
THE book to read!.......2003-06-29
This book is, undoubtedly, THE best book to read insofar as the history of voting in America. Keyssar writes a fabulous book - meticulously detailing critical historical information - in a manner that is readable and enjoyable. The author does a marvelous job in citing his sources.
For all individuals interested in the history of the backbone to American democracy - the right to vote - this is a book that must be read!
Don't take it for granted.......2002-12-15
The Right to Vote: The Contested History of Democracy in the United States should be on your required reading list if you are interested in the history of the democratic experiment in the United States. Alexander Keyssar has produced that most unusual book-both enjoyable and profoundly informative.
Keyssar traces the always contentious right of Americans to participate in democracy. I, like most others, take for granted that voting is part of our system. We are wrong. As this book shows, the right to vote has been-and continues to be-more an issue of which group has the reigns of power than a fundamental right enjoying consensus support.
While The Right to Vote fully covers the struggles of women and African Americans to obtain and keep their voting rights, it also tells the history of voting requirements tied to property ownership, immigration status, and the still-debated criminal status. While focusing on suffrage, Professor Keyssar creates a cohesive political history of the United States.
The Right to Vote is one of those important history books that should be read and then often used as a source of reference for all those concerned about our political system.
The Coming of Democracy?.......2002-10-21
This is a very good history of the right to vote over the course of American history, with some surprises that shouldn't be for those left teary-eyed by the Fourth of July speeches concerning such matters. Democracy has evolved since the beginning of the American experiment, and we should hope that it will continue to do so, to earn its title. Created as a republic in the old-fashioned sense,with conditions of property for eligibility, the slow progression toward 'democracy' begins in the generations after the American Revolution, proceeding briskly yet with severe delimitations, the Civil, Reconstruction, the Second Reconstruction, and the woman's suffrage movement being important by-stations. This account does the job very well of refloatating the shadowy history, ending with a plaintive inspection of the steady retreat of voters from the voting booths. This book could be a useful introduction to the just published book, The Vanishing Voter, and is also, quite apart from its significance for the study of American history, a good companion to the study of the post-Civil War Reconstruction, where the general trend toward democratization actually reversed itself.
Informative look at American Democracy.......2002-09-05
One of the things that Americans take great pride in is the democratic nature of their country. Keyssar shows that this democratic nature took a long time to develop and that the concept of "universal" suffrage is really very recent.
Supported by a lot of information (the supplementary materials make up around 25% of the book), Keyssar shows that American history is made up of lots of incidents of people trying to gain voting rights, including women, various ethnic groups, men without property and eighteen year olds. The progression to universal suffrage was neither smooth nor always forward: there were numerous cases when voting rights were taken away from a group.
Although this book is very informative and filled with important material, the subject of voting rights is not always very exciting. Keyssar does a good job overall - and keeps reasonably objective in the process - but there are times when this can be a slow read. Nonetheless, for those interested in distinguishing between the myths and truths of American history, this is a worthwhile read.
Book Description
Many on both sides of the political fence were mystified by, and in some cases, furious at, the Supreme Court's decision in Bush v. Gore. While legal columnists lined up to decry the court's decision in the days following its ruling, nobody has explained the decision in the context of the court's history of dealing with politically-charged cases, and nobody has looked in detail at how the individual justice's previous writings were or were not reflected in the ruling. In 'Supreme Injustice', Alan Dershowitz will approach the ruling systematically from historical, political , and legal grounds. His ultimate conclusion will be that the Supreme Court did more damage to itself than is apparent now, creating a disturbing precedent that will come back to haunt it, and sullying its and the American judicial system's reputation for fairness at home and abroad. He will also speculate as to why the Court ruled as it did and explore the myriad consequences of the decision. Alan Dershowitz is famous for explaining complicated legal concepts in a serious but accessible style, both in his Harvard Law School criminal law class and in his numerous books. 'Supreme Injustice', written in this characteristic style, will be published, in all likelihood, in a period where the 'spirit of bipartisanship' currently celebrated by politicians and the media will almost assuredly have begun to wear off, and in which we may have established with some certainty that Al Gore won Florida. It's likely that this combination of events will leave many who disagreed with the ruling looking for a thoughtful explanation of how and why it happened, and it's our belief that they will turn to this book.
Download Description
Millions of Americans were baffled and outraged by the U.S. Supreme Court's role in ending the presidential election of 2000 with its controversial ruling in Bush v. Gore. The Court had held a unique place in our system of checks and balances, and was seen as the embodiment of fairness and principle precisely because it was perceived to be above the political fray. How could it issue decisions that reeked of partisan politics, and send to the White House a candidate who, for all it knew at the time, may have actually lost the election? In Supreme Injustice, bestselling author and legal expert Alan M. Dershowitz addresses these questions head-on, at last demystifying Bush v. Gore for those who are still angered by the court's decision but unclear about its meaning.
Customer Reviews:
Book review.......2005-09-12
My order was processed in an acceptable amount of time. Book was in condition as advertised.
He makes it interesting.......2005-08-06
Dershowitz makes this potentially dry subject very interesting, while remaining credible. Although I went into the book agreeing with the author, the book got me angry all over again. I'd guess that even those who wanted a Bush presidency would find much of the information in this book interesting.
Digital Version of Supreme Injustice, Alan Dershowitz.......2004-12-18
The biggest dissapointment I had with getting this book is that I purchased the Microsoft Reader Version. One is led to believe that one can highlight, cut and paste, etc., by using this new tool for reading. Actually, all you get is electronic pages that are inert. They cannot be printed, one cannot cut and paste from them, all one can do is stare at them on the screen. In order to transfer the print from screen to one's computer, one must first copy (by hand) the print, re-type it on screen into another program, then save. In other words, the e-version, for the researcher is not only ABSOLUTELY USELESS, it DOUBLES THE AMOUNT OF WORK ONE MUST DO TO EXCERPT MATERIAL FROM A BOOK.
I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT KIND OF PERSON MICROSOFT HAD IN MIND WHEN THEY CREATED THIS INFLEXIBLE PRODUCT. IT IS CERTAINLY A DISASTER FOR ME, AND I INTEND TO REQUEST A REFUND ON MY "DIGITAL PURCHASE" SINCE ALL I PURCHASED WAS AN INERT, DOUBLE-THE-WORK TO READ AND EXCERPT BOOK. WHAT A DISASTER! WHAT AN UNMITIGATED DISASTER. IT SORT OF MAKES ONE WONDER WHY THEY EVEN WENT TO THE TROUBLE TO CREATE THIS PRODUCT.
Explains the damage done to American justice in this case.......2004-10-18
For those who do not know the story, the American Presidential election in 2000 was very close. Democrat Al Gore received more popular votes than Republican George W Bush, but such elections are decided state by state, and the winner in Florida was to determine who would be President. In Florida, more voters intended to vote for Gore than for Bush, but due to several irregularities, the vote was very close. Close enough to require a mandatory recount. Close enough so that either candidate could ask for a hand count of disputed ballots.
As it turned out, a complete recount of all ballots would have confirmed that Gore had won. According to Florida law, such a recount should have been performed. When a recount got under way, it grew increasingly clear that Gore might well win. However, the Republican strategy (in a state where Bush's brother was the governor) was to refuse a recount or to delay any recount until the Presidential winner had to be announced. If the Democrats protested, they would take the case to court. To the Supreme Court. And if they lost that case, they would simply have the Florida legislature declare Bush the winner of the state. Either way, Bush would win an illegitimate victory.
Given that the initial count favored Bush, a Republican victory could not be prevented. And even in the unlikely event that a complete hand count (including "overvotes") favored Bush, neutral observers would still note that a plurality of the Florida voters had tried to vote for Gore, and that Florida law was to favor the clear intent of the voters. So the illegitimacy of the result was inevitable no matter how the hand count came out. The only question was where the blame would rest. Would it be on those in Florida who delayed the count? On the Florida legislature? On the Florida Courts? Or on the Supreme Court?
Dershowitz explains how the blame wound up being applied, quite accurately, to the Supreme Court, which took a case and judged it purely on a partisan basis. And he explains what the result of this mischief will be. First, unlike a miscarriage of justice in a criminal case, which might get blamed on the jurors, the Supreme Court judges are there for life. They'll be considered untrustworthy by a huge number of people for the rest of their lives, and that will make the Supreme Court less credible as long as any of them remain on it. Dershowitz also says that it will call into much greater question the entire process by which Supreme Court judges are selected. And of course, this entire affair has exposed the absurdities of our voting system to the world, which regards us with less esteem as a result.
Many Americans were annoyed with the Supreme Court simply because it picked someone other than the person they voted for. Others were angry because it picked the loser rather than the winner. However, Dershowitz is more concerned with the Supreme Court having showed partisanship at all, especially in a manner that threatens the carefully established checks and balances among branches of government so carefully laid out in our Constitution.
Finally, Dershowitz reminds us that the authority of the Supreme Court "rests on public acceptance of its status as a nonpartisan arbiter of law." Judicial integrity gets built up slowly and in this case was squandered quickly. This book does an excellent job of showing just how dismally the Supreme Court performed here.
U.S. Supreme Court Saved America from Civil War!.......2004-06-14
U.S. Supreme Court Saved America from Civil War!
The USA Supreme Court saved America. The USA Constitution saved America from chaos, instalbiliy.
The Constitution created three distinct branches of government with "check and balaces". The "legislative", "executive", "judicial" are vested in three seperate branches of government.... and yet Presidents appoint Judges, the Senate can veto Presidential treaties, Congress can override the Presidents veto on a bill....
That how it is supposed to work. Each of the three branches is distinct, seperate, and yet still exercise power over the other.
The USA Supreme Court stepped in to stop the endless recount and saved America from a Civil War. The Supreme Court did the job it was supposed to. The Supreme Court did the job given by the Constitution.
THOSE CAN DO WILL DO, THOSE CANNOT DO WILL TEACH.
Dershowitz is an academic, with tenure, of course, job for life, until he drops dead. Academic never have to work, compete, produce goods, services like in the real world.
If this know-it-all is so smart, why doesn't he run for Congress or President.
Those cannot do will get a job teaching.
Book Description
This fascinating and disturbing book is the official record of testimony taken by the Democratic Members and Staff of the House Judiciary Committee, presided over by Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, the Ranking Member. Originally published in January, 2005 by the Government Printing Office, it has been edited and re-designed for maximum readability. Both a riveting and alarming report on the status of our ailing presidential election process, this book provides new insights into the abuse and manipulation of electronic voting machines and the arbitrary and illegal behavior of a number of elected and election officials which effectively disenfranchised tens of thousands of voters in order to change the outcome of an election. The material in this report should be used as a guidebook to fixing our federal elections.
Customer Reviews:
how to "fix" an election.......2007-07-12
I love the Editorial Review book description 'The material in this report should be used as a guidebook to "fixing" our federal elections.'
There's Something Rotten in the State of Ohio.......2006-09-27
In his book "Armed Madhouse..." author Greg Palast quotes Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin. "It's not the votes that count. It's who counts the votes." After you read the dry but factual 116 pages of this book, you will come to the inescapable conclusion that the election was stolen from presidential candidate John Kerry and given to Mr. Bush.
The book is divided into facts (what happened) and analysis (the motive and how it could have happened). It starts with Ohio's secretary of state, a republican, Kenneth Blackwell who promised to "fill in the blanks" regarding voting anomalies but has kept silent in the finest tradition of "political omerta." He has refused to initiate any investigations, and has tried his best to have the ballots destroyed.
Here's some of what Conyers uncovers:
Republican challengers were at every precinct causing massive voting delays. This is called caging, and it is illegal. Republican challengers targeted 97% of new voters in black areas. They only challenged 14% of new voters in white areas.
There were voting machine lockdowns preventing observation of ballot counts. This too is illegal.
There were flipped votes. Voters reported that they had voted for Kerry and watched their vote register for George Bush. These "glitches" were called "calibration problems."
The number of votes vs. voters. In many places the number of voter turn-out exceeded 100%. (?) In one case nearly 19,000 votes were added after all precincts reported.
There were repairs being made by the electronic voting machine company while the ballots were being recounted. This too is illegal.
In Ohio the exit polls which asked the people how they voted, showed that Kerry had won. Men and women voters gave a majority to Kerry. These polls are usually very accurate. So, how did exit polls that put Kerry ahead 52% to 48% turn around after the ballots were counted?
After reading this book, you can only arrive at one conclusion: There's something rotten in the state of Ohio.
Update: Blackwell ran for governor in Ohio this past November and was defeated. Those ballots he could not manage to hide.
An American Patriot, John CONYERS For President........2006-09-07
As with his always-learned, always JUDICIOUS "sponsorship," or whatever the REPUB. "Americans$$," allowed him to term it, of the explosive DOWNING STREET MEMO(S) hearings of June, 2005, Congressman Conyers has done it again, with this telling and factually-based book, telling just a part of the story, of yet again, the FAS$CISTS$, ie the REPUB. "Americans$$$," under this "King" George The Second, with his Utterly SERVANTILE, Election-THIEVING CRIMINAL, as Ohio's only ALLEGED 'Secretary of State," IE his being the Co-CAMPAIGN HEAD for OHIO, of the BUSH-CHENEY Campaign.
(*****-And what IF JOHN F. KERRY, had won Ohio, or any OTHER State's "Votes," and "Election," under such Criminally UNETHICAL Circumstances?! The REPUB. "Americans$$" in the White House and Congress$$$, would be calling for Kerry';s head, if not his Public CRUCIFIXION, much like they REFUSED to "PATRIOTICALLY, and Decently," Back up DULY-ELECTED President CLINTON in his AIRSTRIKES and MASSIVE CRUISE Missile Strikes against Bin Laden's Camps in Afghanistan, AND his Chemical Weapon PRECURSOR Material Factor in Al Shifa, Sudan. INSTEAD these Repub. "Americans$$" would only cry out., "No Wars for MONICA," and "Hand over the semen-stained BLUE DRESS"?! 9 or MORE of the Repub. "Americans$" on the Repub. "Impeachement" teams, in seanate and congress, were SERIAL WIFE-CHEATERS, themselves!) Well Done, congressman Cponyers, Sir, a TRUE American Patriot, in utter CONTRAST to the FAS$CISTS, such as KARL ROVE, GW BUS$H, and Ohio Secretary of State, Ken, toally, ANTI-"Black"WELL!!
They, GW and Karl ROVE also MET with BLACKWELL
< right on that TUESDAY, Nov. 2nd, "Election" Day Morning in COLUMBUS, OHIO, to Further FINALIZE their Plans to STEAL OHIO. That CRIMINAL MEETING, alone, merits impeachment hearings, though SO VERY MUCH more, lawless WIRETAPPING of tens of MILLIONS of Americans(when AL QUEDA, long since, years ago, STOPPED Using the internet and even cell phones in their important communications, they only USE COURIERS, according to our OWN Intel. Services), the AGGRESSIVE WARS$ in IRAQ, and Iran to follow, for their OIL RESERVES$$, the Pre-9/11/2001 DEALINGS$ with, and Bribings$ of the TALIBAN LEADERSHIP, in AFGHANISTAN, for the CENTRAL ASIAN Gas/Oil Pipelines$, this TRAITOROUS$, as well, as Outgoing Clinton OfficialS, many of them TRIED TO WARN all of the incoming "Elected"(after 12/12/2000 UNSIGNED "Ruling," by the CRIMINAL US Supreme, "Court," ah-hem) BUS$H ADMINISTRATION,m that the AL QUEDA THREAT would be their greatest THREAT and Concern, throughout the Bush Presidency, this "way back"(but a blink of the eye, to "God," though, Folks!) in Dec. 2000-January 2001!!
Add to this GW Bus$h's seeing the August 6th, 2001 FULLY Documented CIA, etcetera, Dire Warning and "Memo"{though it was much MORE involved than THAT, as were the INTEL. Agency warnings in Summer-fall of 2001, from over 20 Allied and other Nations, of an IMMINENT AL QUEDA Attack on US Soil, so much so that at the july, 2001 Genoa G-8 Economic talks, the ENTIRE AREA of the talks and of genoa, Italy, was RINGED with anti-aircraft MISSILES, and GW had to Sleep off shore in a Battleship or aircraft carrier, John ASHCROFT stops flying Commercial AIRLINES in June-July 2001, onwards, but has his FBI warn NO ONE, in the nation's aviation system?!), etcetera, etcetera, etcetera, and you can see why, ... well, we need a U.S. "GOVERMENT-IN-EXILE" to start, against this Twice, "elected" Bunch, folks, like it or don't.
Again, well done, Congressman CONYERS, SIR!! Leftist and PROUDLY, PROGRESSIVELY-PATRIOT, "Ex" Marine(who took my pledge to Uphold the US CONSTITUTION, above ALL ELSE!!) herein, God Bless Yee, good Lad!!
And to OHIO's "Secretary of State," and perhaps, to be Criminally "Elected," as well, as "Governor" of Ohio, Mr. J. Kenneth, ANTI-"BLACK"-Well, Sir, ... May The Good Lord, Blessed Jesus, i.e., JOSHUA, I.E., The Christ of Human History, I.E.,the PRINCE, ... of PEACE, have mercy on your LOST SOUL, Sir.
Democrats always right, Republicans always wrong.......2006-05-01
Clinton 1996, 49% of vote - winner
Bush 2004, 51% of vote - loser
Right...
What went wrong in Ohio??.......2006-02-15
The only thing that went wrong in Ohio is that it gave the idiot Dems another thing to WHINE ABOUT!! Which we Republicans are pleanty tired of!! Mrs. Miller, please don't quit your day job!! The book really needs help.
Book Description
Read
never-before-published anecdotes, commentaries, and interviews from key insiders about the most exciting Presidential Election in our nation's history!
- Provides unique, riveting insider stories and analyses of the election that will capture readers' attention while helping them to understand why things happened as they did.
- Contributors include: George Terwilliger (Bush legal team); Ron Klain and Jeremy Bash (Gore legal team); Donnie Fowler (Gore campaign advisor); Tom Fiedler (Editor, Miami Herald); Larry J. Sabato and Joshua Scott (University of Virginia); Chuck Babbington (Washington Post); Diana Owens (Georgetown University); Tim Burger (NY Daily News); Jake Tapper (Salon.com/CNN); and Rhodes Cook (The Rhodes Cook Letter).
- Offers never-before-published information about Election 2000!
Edited by Larry Sabato, this collection of first-hand stories and analyses offers stunning insights into "the election of the century" from the people who were there. George Terwilliger from the Bush legal team and Ron Klain and Jeremy Bash from the Gore legal team provide insider accounts of the Florida ballot recount battle. Tim Burger of the NY Daily News writes a previously unpublished story about the Bush DUI, Diana Owen from Georgetown University provides unique coverage of the media consortium recount, and Tom Fiedler, editor of the Miami Herald -which was at the "center of the storm"- writes the introductory chapter. Overtime stands far out from the crowd of books on Election 2000 because it contains original, never-before-seen material and because it offers a wide spectrum of insider views, providing a balance of journalistic, academic, and campaigner accounts. Because it combines political journalism with solid political science research, it is both highly readable and enlightening. And because Overtime was written and published after the initial rush of post-election books, it includes data and stories that have been revealed since the first wave hit the bookstands. Overtime is not only an entertaining read with a unique insider's view, but will help readers truly make sense of this complex and historic election. It walks readers through the story of the election, offers a context for understanding why things happened as they did, and leaves them with a more meaningful appreciation of the powerful effects this election had, and will continue to have, on our political system.
Larry J. Sabato is at the University of Virginia. According to The Wall Street Journal, Dr. Sabato is "probably the most quoted college professor in the land." The Washington Post calls him "the Mark McGwire of political analysts." He has appeared on dozens of nationally broadcast television shows, including
"60 Minutes", "Nightline", "Face the Nation", "The Today Show", "Good Morning America", "48 Hours", "Larry King Live," and "The Jim Lehrer News Hour." Dr. Sabato is the Director of Government Studies at the University of Virginia and is the recipient of more than two dozen major scholarships, grants, and academic awards, and has written 19 books, including: Feeding Frenzy: How Attack Journalism Has Transformed American Politics (Lanahan, ISBN 0965268780); Peep Show: Media and Politics in an Age of Scandal (Rowman & Littlefield, ISBN 0742500101); and Dirty Little Secrets: The Persistence of Corruption in American Politics (Random House, ISBN 0812924991).
Customer Reviews:
A rare impartial book on Election Day 2000.......2003-09-16
There are many books that have been written on the subject: from Bill Sammon's book "At Any Cost" on the right to Alan Dershowitz' "Supreme Injustice" on the left. Sabato's is a rare thing, a book that tries to be impartial, and succeeds.
It has chapters by legal advisors to both Gore's and Bush's sides in the legal wrangles that followed the election, as well as journalists and academics. If you want to know what happened, as seen by all sides, this is about the only book that will tell you that.
The only negative point I can make is a printing job that is somewhat careless; missing apostrophes abound, and my copy has two of one page and is missing another. But that does not bear on the book's merit itself.
About Time: Overtime!.......2001-09-22
Not long before the chads stopped swinging in the last presidential election, pundits and pollsters were sharpening their wits and dusting off their finger pointing apparatus. Their goal was to isolate the who, what, where, why, and how of the controverial election results in Florida. That election brought everybody who was anybody, including the Supreme Court, to the edge of their seats for days. The indefatigable Sultan of Soundbites, UVA Professor Larry J. Sabato, had seen enough and done enough in politics to realize this was history, and deserved to be given a thorough investigation. So he collected a group of insiders and commentators to take their best shot at turning over stones and writing about what crawled out. The result was Overtime! The Election 2000 Thriller. No casual or serious student of US history should be without a copy. Congratulations to Dr. Sabato and Joshua Scott, his coauthor and editorial assistant from the UVA Center for Governmental Studies on a job exceptionally well done. Buy this book for yourself, and at the reasonable price, grab a couple copies for friends as well. It's guaranteed to reveal facts that even the media savvy US public has not to this point realized. Alyson L. Taylor-White, Editor, Virginia Review
What the media didn't, and won't, tell us........2001-09-14
Will only political junkies or long-ago residents of Florida (I plead partly guilty of the first and fully guilty of the second), appreciate this book? I think not, but it does help to have given up excessive idealism ("Politics is so corrupt!") and excessive cynicism ("People are so corrupt!") in favor of an occasional visit to realism.
With the media giving us mainly--and often only--sensation, and seeing law as a struggle by imperfect human beings to create some justice in the world, I liked best the stories told by the attorneys for both sides.
Fair, Balanced and Fascinating.......2001-09-07
Overtime is a great look back it this election. For me, it was interesting to go back and put the whole campaign/election in perspective from start to finish. It's also nice to read a book like this that seems to be written from a non-partisan viewpoint. Sabato presents both sides of all the issues and is equally critical of both campaigns. In about 12 years when my son is taking his high school civics class and needs a topic for a book report or paper - I will dust off this book and hand it to him. On a side note, I recently saw Mr. Sabato speak at a conference I attended. If you ever get the chance, go see him! He is very informative and quite humorous.
Sabato's Best Ever---The Making of the President 2000.......2001-08-30
Ever since Theodore White died, I've been searching for a political author who can communicate the excitement of a campaign while grounding his or her work in facts. I've found him: Larry Sabato. I've read several of his books such as Feeding Frenzy, and I've been impressed. But OVERTIME is his best yet. He's put together an all-star team to tell the truth about the incredible election of 2000. Unlike a lot of the other books on 2000, he leaves out the spin and bias, and he focuses on reality. Who needs spin when you have the most dramatic election in modern American history? OVERTIME helped me to really understand the most historic election of my lifetime. It's the best book out there on 2000---BY FAR.
Book Description
As sites of race riots, shrinking swimsuits, and conspicuous leisure, swimming pools reflect the tensions and transformations that have given rise to modern America.
Customer Reviews:
A Social History of an Unusual Aspect of America.......2007-05-30
Here comes summer, and Americans will head for a trusted way of getting rid of stress and heat: they will jump into swimming pools. But pools themselves have been a source of stress to many communities within the nation; indeed, Jeff Wiltse has written a history of the social tensions pools have caused (and sometimes eased) in _Contested Waters: A Social History of Swimming Pools in America_ (University of North Carolina Press). It is surprising that what might seem a trivial subject, a pastime in which millions of Americans have innocently indulged for over a hundred years now, might even have a history. But Wiltse, who teaches history at the University of Montana, has driven from town to town to draw information for this book. His travels were mostly in the north, for he did not want to range too far and write separate regional histories, although he says the pattern of social use of pools is consistent within the towns he surveyed. He amassed a huge amount of data from newspapers and civic documents about who was using the pools, with statistics often kept by race and sex. Wiltse has shown beyond doubt that pools have reflected and generated our feelings on sexual and racial matters, and although his book is a serious academic history, it is by turns amusing and sad as America came to an incomplete understanding of how we ought to treat pools and the swimmers who use them.
We didn't have pools originally, going down to swim in the river or "the old swimming hole". The swimmers often had no running water at home and this was a way for them to wash away some bodily grime; their Victorian betters strongly agreed with bathing for this purpose, but not with the way it was being accomplished. The problem of how to get those underclass clean without letting their pastoral cavorting offend others resulted in a solution, the first municipal bathing pools. Remarkably, there was not racial segregation in these initial pools. Pools changed again when they became not centers for training but locales for play. The huge pools were viewed as resorts, places where a family might come on vacation, and they had sand around them for artificial beaches. Pools had been segregated by gender, but these were not; because of fretting over what might happen if white women saw athletic black bodies, or if blacks started appreciating the displayed bodies of white women, racial segregation of pools began. There was violence in many cities when black people tried to use the pool. The way one city after another attempted to exclude black people in different ways makes for uncomfortable reading.
Desegregation eventually happened, but the victory turned out to be Pyrrhic. As blacks were admitted, white swimmers stopped going to the public pools, and so it became easier for cities to reduce maintenance on the pools, which fell into disrepair and were closed. Cities had financial crises in the 1970s, further reducing pool budgets, and have never started up another building surge. White swimmers went to private pools or home pools, and Americans aren't putting a high value on public recreation as much as they used to. Suburban communities are building water theme parks, which are busy places for kids, but do not foster the socialization that families used to find around a public pool. It may not have worked out to be the best outcome for either blacks or whites, but that's the way history works out sometimes. Wiltse's readable history gives a surprising outlook on important aspects of American culture, and shows that swimming pools are far more consequential than you'd expect.
Book Description
Award-winning journalist Robert Zelnick gives us an insider's look at the most controversial U.S. presidential election in modern history, detailing both the hard facts and the roller coaster of human emotions experienced on both sides through every dramatic step of the way. "Bob Zelnick gives us an insider's account of how Jim Baker and his team held Florida for George W. Bush. Rich in detail, legal and political analysis, and humor, Winning Florida is a must read for anyone seeking to understand how the key Bush decisions were really made." — Ted Koppel, ABC News "An absorbing inside account of how the Bush legal team James Baker put together beat David Boies and the Gore lawyers in Florida. What's fascinating is how much help they got from Boies himself, who made a series of costly miscalculations even as the media were swooning over him." — Brit Hume, Fox News "Histories of what happened in the famous Florida vote deadlock of 2000 will continue to be written for years to come. To his credit, Bob Zelnick doesn't try to look at everything in that tangled web. What he has done is expertly lay out the legal maneuvering in both the Bush and Gore camp better than anyone else I've read. At the end, I felt as if I understood the briefs completely—without having to endure reading all of them." — John Fund, Wall Street Journal
Customer Reviews:
The Bush Team's Successful Strategy that Won Them Florida.......2005-06-10
This was a well written book. I was able to comprehend the steps that the Bush team used in their plight to win Florida. He introduces the reader to several key players in Bush's campaign run and includes excerpts from interviews with them which provide the reader with a first hand account of what actually happened. There was indeed method to this madness! It does, however, have a conservative lean; after all, he did interview Bush's top advisors for his campaign. He also hints the fact that the RNC had a meeting that touched on the possibilities of a recount way before it ever happened! Interesting, huh? I recommend this book to anyone interested in anything regarding the politics involved in the Florida election
More a narrative than an analysis.......2003-06-20
Zelnick's exploration into the Bush v. Gore controversy serves as an entertaining narrative and gives personality to the faces behind the legal battle. With a twinge of Republican bias (and by twinge I mean satanic Bush worshiper), Zelnick recounts Election 2000 in an entertaining day by day story. If you're looking for insightful legal or political analysis into the decision, then this is the wrong place to look, however, if you want quick read to familiarize yourself with the Conservative perspective of the case, then this is a good buy.
More a narrative than an analysis.......2003-06-20
Zelnick's exploration into the Bush v. Gore controversy serves as an entertaining narrative and gives personality to the faces behind the legal battle. With a twinge of Republican bias (and by twinge I mean satanic Bush worshiper), Zelnick recounts Election 2000 in an entertaining day by day story. If you're looking for insightful legal or political analysis into the decision, then this is the wrong place to look, however, if you want quick read to familiarize yourself with the Conservative perspective of the case, then this is a good buy.
A Comprehensive guide to the character Of Algore.......2002-02-05
The most unsettling thing about this book is it becomes clear that the news media, Gore's lawyers and many others, including the Florida Supreme Court, knowingly conspired to steal the election of 2000
The saddest thing to me was that both Gore and the media knew what they were doing, and that Bush had clearly won the election, and yet Gore continued to mount a case he AND his attorney's knew was a lie, and the media assisted in the plot by allowing attacks on Sec. Harris and any others who wouldn't "Play Ball"
This book is the single greatest case against allowing partisans to have any part in elections. The Gore team cared little about legal votes and less about the law.....
Algore's beard is a visible example of how much he believes in the Taliban code of justice.....our way or die.
Book Description
The dramatic struggle over the outcome of the 2000 presidential election presented judges with an extraordinary political challenge, as well as a historic political temptation. In The Votes That Counted Howard Gillman offers a comprehensive yet critical assessment of how well courts coped with the competing expectations for impartial justice and favorable partisan results.
Lively and authoritative, the book documents how the participants, the press, the academic community, and the public responded during these tension-filled thirty-six days. Gillman also provides a serious yet accessible overview of the legal strategies and debates-from briefs and oral arguments to final decisions. However, in explaining the behavior of courts, he moves beyond an analysis of law to also take into account the influences of partisanship, judicial ideology, and broader political and historical contexts.
Appropriately, Gillman pays special attention to the judges whose behavior generated the most controversy—the battling justices of the Florida and United States Supreme Courts. After carefully reviewing the arguments for and against their decisions, he concludes that the five justices behind the Bush v. Gore decision acted outside what should be considered the acceptable boundaries of judicial power. Gillman ends with an analysis of why they chose such an unprecedented course of action and an assessment of whether their partisan intervention will have any lasting effect on the Supreme Court's reputation and authority.
Customer Reviews:
Fine academic look at..........2005-07-14
the outcome of 2000 election and how America got there. The book chronologically relives the legal battles in courts by pro-Bush and pro-Gore forcs culminating with a 5-4 Supreme Court rulings overturning Florida's Supreme Court. Well written and well researched. If after reading the book you are still sincerely convinced that Bush v. Gore (I) and (II) were legally sound decisions, I would recommend another book: "The Attitudial Model (Revised)" by Segal and Spaeth.
Fast Production, Disappointing Results.......2003-08-13
The book is definitely biased, as the author admits. Some biased books are OK, but this one is really one-sided and employs such irrational discourse that you wonder how they accepted it as "academic." I think the topic was hot at the moment, and the publisher did not carefully read the whole thing. Also how can you explain that a professor committed so many grammatical errors, and the editor let them errors go? You thought that maybe they had real peer review and real editing before publishing. 'Guess a timely book can be published, even if it's biased and uses the style and grammar typically associated with writings of a struggling middle school student. All in all, this one's a mystery.
Very good reporting, but poor editing.......2003-05-06
In this book, The Votes that Counted, Howard Gillman does a masterful job of reporting the facts that led up to the dispute, and the chronology of events during the aftermath of the Presidential Election in November, 2000.
Naturally, Gillman focuses on Florida, which was the state of most interest in the election, since its electoral votes would ultimately determine who would reside in the White House.
Gillman is, in my opinion, biased, with an evident fondness of the Democratic Party. There is, of course, nothing wrong with being opiniated, and Gillman does not let this interfere with his reporting of the evident facts.
Gillman's analysis of the election and the subsequent judicial participation is a good one, and certainly does correlate well with the title of the book; he explains well why he feels that the justices of the Supreme Court (all five of them that sided with Bush) determined who the next President of the United States would be.
As I was reading this book, I frequently found that I had to stop and re-read some sentences multiple times in order to understand the meaning; verbs were conjugated improperly, and improper tenses were used. I do not fault the author for these grammatical errors - I fault the editor for failing to catch and correct them.
I found this to be a valuable book, and one worthy of studying carefully as study of the Presidental election of 2000 and judicial intervention in that contest. I gave it four stars rather than five because of what I see as a lack of strong editing.
Time to read it again.......2003-03-15
I first ran into this book at my college library and renewed it twice so I could take my time enjoying it. A year later I bought it. I play on reading it again on Spring Break.
Placing the reader inside the legal system so soon after the decision, the author was able to capture the feelings of the justices and judges while the emotions were still in the air.
The only major downfall of this book is the lack of logic expressed by the author several times to support his views. However, in any book in which the author admits a bias, I am inclined to assume there will be a slant to support his view when I read it.
I feel this book is so good, I still give it 5 stars.
Not Biased?.......2002-12-08
The two stars are given for the acute factual account of the events and their proceedings of the election. And while the author does offer arguments to both sides of the debate (whether the final ruling by the supreme court was partisan or not), he often gives illegitimate reasons for dismissing the argument against partisanship while promoting his that is was a partisan decision. Case in point he dedicates 4 pages to the defense of the majority justices rulings (2 of which are dismissals of the argument) while giving some 25 pages to the opposing argument never offering any sound reasoning as to why it itself may be wrong. There are severe holes in many of his reasonings as he often contradicts himself. I was also astounded by the many grammatical errors and misprints, which is naturally to be blamed on the editor. Overall, the book provides a great summation of events, but the only real bias is that of the author's view, regardless of whether he is correct. Clearly this was a one-sided, unfair analysis of the debate with pitiful attempts to appear judicious and fair-sided in its logic.
Books:
- Deep Economy: The Wealth of Communities and the Durable Future
- Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture: Based on the Competing Values Framework (Addison-Wesley Series on Organization Development)
- Difficult Conversations: How to Discuss what Matters Most
- Digital Crossroads: American Telecommunications Policy in the Internet Age
- Encountering the Chinese: A Guide for Americans (The Interact Series)
- Encounters with the Archdruid
- Entrepreneur's Notebook: Practical Advice for Starting a New Business Venture
- Family Reunion Handbook: A Complete Guide for Reunion Planners (Family Reunion Handbook)
- Fundamentals of Multinational Finance (2nd Edition) (Eiteman Series)
- Global "Body Shopping": An Indian Labor System in the Information Technology Industry (In-formation)
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- New Manufacturing Challenge: Techniques for Continuous Improvement
- Edible Forest Gardens
- Story Sense: A Screenwriter's Guide for Film and Television
- The Secret Destiny of America
- Why Did They Kill
- Enter Jeeves: 15 Early Stories
- Animal Biotechnology and the Quality of Meat Production
- Real Estate Accounting and Reporting
- South-Western Accounting for QuickBooks Pro 2004
- Voyage to the North Star: A Novel
Criticism
| Architecture
| Professional & Technical
| Subjects
| Books
Atlas of Novel Tectonics
The Projective Cast: Architecture and Its Three Geometries
Tooling (Pamphlet Architecture)
Phylogenesis foa's ark: foreign office architects
Catalytic Formations
