Book Description
Masters of the Air is the deeply personal story of the American bomber boys in World War II who brought the war to Hitler's doorstep. With the narrative power of fiction, Donald Miller takes readers on a harrowing ride through the fire-filled skies over Berlin, Hanover, and Dresden and describes the terrible cost of bombing for the German people.
Fighting at 25,000 feet in thin, freezing air that no warriors had ever encountered before, bomber crews battled new kinds of assaults on body and mind. Air combat was deadly but intermittent: periods of inactivity and anxiety were followed by short bursts of fire and fear. Unlike infantrymen, bomber boys slept on clean sheets, drank beer in local pubs, and danced to the swing music of Glenn Miller's Air Force band, which toured U.S. air bases in England. But they had a much greater chance of dying than ground soldiers. In 1943, an American bomber crewman stood only a one-in-five chance of surviving his tour of duty, twenty-five missions. The Eighth Air Force lost more men in the war than the U.S. Marine Corps.
The bomber crews were an elite group of warriors who were a microcosm of America -- white America, anyway. (African-Americans could not serve in the Eighth Air Force except in a support capacity.) The actor Jimmy Stewart was a bomber boy, and so was the "King of Hollywood," Clark Gable. And the air war was filmed by Oscar-winning director William Wyler and covered by reporters like Andy Rooney and Walter Cronkite, all of whom flew combat missions with the men.
The Anglo-American bombing campaign against Nazi Germany was the longest military campaign of World War II, a war within a war. Until Allied soldiers crossed into Germany in the final months of the war, it was the only battle fought inside the German homeland.
Strategic bombing did not win the war, but the war could not have been won without it. American
airpower destroyed the rail facilities and oil refineries that supplied the German war machine. The bombing campaign was a shared enterprise: the British flew under the cover of night while American bombers attacked by day, a technique that British commanders thought was suicidal.
Masters of the Air is a story, as well, of life in wartime England and in the German prison camps, where tens of thousands of airmen spent part of the war. It ends with a vivid description of the grisly hunger marches captured airmen were forced to make near the end of the war through the country their bombs destroyed.
Drawn from recent interviews, oral histories, and American, British, German, and other archives, Masters of the Air is an authoritative, deeply moving account of the world's first and only bomber war.
Customer Reviews:
Masters of the Air.......2007-09-11
A marvelous story about the WW II air war over Europe. Full of interesting details and descriptions. I have shared it with friends that did their 35 missions, and they concur.
The Story of the "Mighty Eighth".......2007-09-08
This well-written and exhaustively researched book chronicles the rise of the American Eighth Air Force from its early days in England to VE Day in 1945.
At the outset of the war, the British believed that night bombing was the best way to attack German cities and industry. However, once America entered the war, they chose a philosophy different from that of the British. The Americans believed that daylight precision strategic bombing was the only way to defeat the Germans. The British, on the other hand, still favored nighttime area bombing. This difference of opinion between the Americans and British was never really settled, but by combining the "round the clock" attacks of American planes during the day and British planes at night, the Germans faced an unending stream of planes and bombs.
When the Eighth flew their first mission in the fall of 1942, they could barely muster thirty planes, but at the end of the war, they were putting up well over one thousand, with several hundred fighter escorts as well. The German Luftwaffe could not match these incredible numbers of planes, and, despite such tactics as underground production and introducing the world's first jet fighter, there was little they could do to stop the Allied bombing.
Differences also existed between the British and Americans regarding target selection. The British favored carpet bombing Germany's cities with little or no regard for civilian casualties. The Americans favored targeting German industry (synthetic oil production, ball bearings, and transportation hubs). The Americans believed that the systematic destruction of the German economy would bring about surrender quicker than the British belief of "terror attacks" designed to break the will of the German people.
An interesting point made by the author is whether or not strategic bombing was effective against the Germans. A preponderance of the evidence would suggest that the answer to this question is "yes", but there are some compelling counter-points made in the book.
This is a fine work of aviation history. The book is well-researched and is easy to read and understand. Every aspect of the Allied bomber offensive in Europe is covered in great detail. The author also includes many personal testimonials from the men who flew the B-17s and B-24s against the Germans. An interesting chapter is also devoted to the Swiss government and how they treated "captured" Allied fliers. The terrifying incendiary raid on Dresden as well as the horrific destruction of Berlin is also told in vivid detail.
I give this fine book my highest recommendation. If you're looking for information on the Eighth Air Force and the air war over Europe, this is the book to read.
Does anyone at Simon & Schuster proofread?.......2007-09-04
Mr. Miller's book includes not only substantial research into prior publications but very interesting research based on letters and interviews he's found on his own. It's a good book. But if you're a member of the word police you'll be annoyed by the many proofreading errors. Here's a sample: "In the heavily defended Ruhr, with its permanent cloud of industrial smoke, the number was only in ten." (p.54) Should have been "within ten miles." Some errors are so simple a spell checker would have caught them: (p.199) "spining" for spinning. And there are some factual errors as well. Miller attributes contrails to wingtips. They're created by engines. It's much easier to criticize than to write. Still, S&S should have, with the several editors listed in the acknowledgments, caught the errors. I have no idea whether they have been corrected in the paperback.
The Unsung Heroes of The Eighth Air Force.......2007-08-26
This is an overdue tribute to those young men who gave their lives, in great numbers, fighting the air war over Germany in WWII.To those who think WWII was fought without major tatical errors, this book will be a revelation. In tribute to the kids who lost their lives in this bloody effort, everyone should be required to read this story. If you thought that service in the Air Force was a cake walk read this book.
EXCELLENT !!!.......2007-08-23
TRULY AN AMAZINGLY DETAILED ACCOUNT OF THE AIR WAR IN EUROPE!! MANY FACTS NEVER HEARD BEFORE! THESE BOMBER BOYS WERE TRUE HEROES.
Book Description
From Afghanistan and Iraq to Europe and the United States we are engaged in one of the most heated wars of all time. In this incisive new book, the man that has been called--the only one to understand the mind of the jihadist--shows that the most important battle is actually taking place in the hearts and minds of the world's population. This is the war of ideas, where ideology is the most powerful weapon of all. Phares explores the beliefs of two opposing camps, one standing for democracy and human rights, and the other rejecting the idea of an international community and calling for jihad against the West. He reveals the strategies of both sides, explaining that new technologies and the growing media savvy of the jihadists have raised the stakes in the conflict. And most urgently, he warns that the West is in danger of losing the war, for whereas debate and theorizing rarely translate into action here, ideas and deeds are inextricably linked for the forces of jihad.
Customer Reviews:
Required reading by every self-respecting journalist........2007-08-23
The facts will set you free. Well researched. Bluntly honest. A very readable treatment of Islamofacism every self-respecting journalist should read. It is now on my short list of books that correctly shape one's understanding of this century's principal narrative.
Great Read!.......2007-06-13
We need more literature like this that expounds on our current situation and dilemma our children will soon face.
The War of Ideas: Jihadism against Democracy .......2007-05-07
This is a very scholarly book. This is not a rabble rouser. It is an excellent book to gain understanding of "Jihadism against Democracy"
Book Description
In 2003, David Horowitz began a campaign to promote intellectual diversity and a return to academic standards in American universities. To achieve these goals he devised an Academic Bill of Rights and created a national student movement with chapters on 160 college campuses. Take No Prisoners is a riveting account of the reaction to Horowitz's campaign by professor unions and academic associations, whose leaderships have been taken over by the political left.
Customer Reviews:
Horowitz exposes the left-wing academic cabal.......2007-09-06
Northwestern University is just down the road from me. I see evidence of the political tilt of the academy all around me. In the seemingly endless numbers of posters espousing an endless variety of left-wing causes, including protecting terrorists who murder innocent civilians. I see it in the daily university newspaper which is distributed in town. I see and hear in the academics I encounter in daily life.
Why parents pay to send their children to a political indoctrination machine which will ultimately destroy the United States is beyond my comprehension.
David Horowitz was once a leftist. He came to his senses and has been combatting left-wing ideology since. In 2002 he "drew up an Academic Bill Of Rights whose purpose was to promote intellectual diversity on college campuses and restore academic values to university classrooms."
Any reasonable person who follows the news knows of Ward Churchill and dozens of other college professors and even high school and middle school teachers who are blatantly anti-American and use their classrooms to influence their student's thinking if not force them to regurgitate left-wing political views.
In this book, Horowitz relies heavily on his personal experiences in campaigning for his proposal to illuminate how the left-wing suppresses any poltical thought that doesn't agree its notions.
Unwittingly, though, Horowitz demonstrated the dangers of left-wing academics. In 2006, Horowitz appeared on the Duke campus. There a small group of demonstrators led by a tenured left-wing academic named Diane Nelson disrupted his address, clearly violating faculty rules of conduct. Shortly thereafter the same Diane Nelson literally signed on as one of the infamous Group of 88. The Group of 88 are a collection of mostly tenured academics at Duke who simply ignored any concept of judicial innocence and condemned three Duke lacrosse players who had been accused of sexually assaulting a black exotic dancer. The Group of 88 made it clear that race and gender trumped judicial process. In their eyes, the accused were guilty until proven innocent, a complete reversal of American Constitutional precepts.
The Group of 88 for months maintained an offensive against anyone who disagreed with them.
Even after the North Carolina Attorney General took the highly unusual step of declaring the three accused completely innocent and that no crime of any kind had occurred and even after the prosecuting attorney was disbarred for witholding evidence, Diane Nelson and the rest of the Group of 88 maintain their left-wing position.
Therein is the danger of allowing political demgogues to hold America's children hostage to their poltiical views. (It should be remembered as well that one of the Group of 88 members flunked two lacrosse players in her class, forcing Duke to settle a lawsuit with one of them.)
Horowitz succeeds in making his point - and he was helped along by circumstances. The hegemeony of the left-wing in academia is a dangerous thing and something similar to Horowitz's Academic Bill Of Rights is required to bring independence back to American academia.
Jerry
INDOCTRINATION U provides an eye-opening argument........2007-07-09
In 2003 the author began a campaign to promote intellectual diversity and a return to academic excellence in American universities, devising an 'Academic Bill of Rights' and launching a nation-wide student movement to support it. INDOCTRINATION U: THE LEFT'S WAR AGAINST ACADEMIC FREEDOM presents a case for the intellectual corruption of American universities by faculty activists who have turned classrooms into political causes. Such academic radicals have no real interest in intellectual discourse deserving of university status, Horowitz maintains: INDOCTRINATION U provides an eye-opening argument.
Code Blue: Horowitz is in a coma.......2007-06-06
Anyone who can write and publish a book in 2007 with the thesis that "leftist thinking" pervades the modern university and is corrupting the minds of youth so that he must draw up a manifesto to protect them is either dreaming, stuck in a time warp, or just plain stuck. Like a comedian who has told the same joke for decades, and wonders why no one laughs at demeaning jokes about his 'wife,' I can only conclude that Horowitz doesn't understand that the world of higher education and the culture at large have changed radically since 1967 (when he was in college).
The most popular majors today in college are Business with its concentrations in finance, marketing, management, etc., or majors that focus on IT and other computer-related subjects. The most popular and sought after master's degree by far) is the M.B.A. So much for transforming undergraduates into countercultural nemeses. Tuition at Harvard University (according to its own website) will be $71,000 with room and board. Would parents lay out thousands of dollars to prep their children from the time they are in elementary school to get into prestige institutions if they heard news from the campus front lines their hard earned and hard spent money was contributing to an army of radicals? The most popular event during the school year at most colleges is career day. I've seen the ritual enacted dozens of times. Oddly, during such events I've never once heard a reference to Gramsci or Trotski. Not even once!
Universities today have virtually frozen any hiring of professors in the humanities, and it's rare that a student need take a course in a subject that could address ideological issues. The only conjecture I'm left with is that Horowitz is still mad at his father for making him attend Hebrew School. Get over it, already.
Addresses a serious problem.......2007-05-31
There's plenty that I like in this book. But there are some things that I would have said differently.
I probably would have used a smaller percentage of the book for anecdotal information. Sure, there are some professors who are abusing their positions and using their classrooms to propagandize. And students in those classes who disagree with such professors may be intimidated, given that their grades are at stake. But anecdotes are not always the best way to present evidence.
To explain what I mean, imagine that you are in a debate about which side the United States fought on in World War Two. You claim that we fought against Japan, while your opponent says that we and Japan were allies against China in that war. Anyway, the evidence that we fought against Japan is overwhelming, and you say so. In addition, you use some anecdotes to confirm it. But to your annoyance, your opponent cites some anecdotes that purport to show the opposite! The discussion gets into details about the anecdotes, and the whole issue looks controversial. Well, that's one reason I am less than enamored of anecdotal evidence.
Continuing my example, your opponent may then attack you as an untrustworthy person. Suddenly, the topic has changed. The issue is no longer World War Two. It's you! That is when you realize that when one has no case, the rules appear to change. You, with an overwhelming case, have truth and logic on your side, so you need to be careful to respect truth and logic. Otherwise, you will cede your advantage in a reasoned discussion. However, your opponent is under no such restrictions!
All this is a little like the theme of this fine book. Yes, there are some anecdotes. And there are discussions about unwarranted ad hominem attacks that are often used by indoctrinators to avoid having to discuss the truth. And we see that although free speech is protected, there are consequences for it. Horowitz says that "a pastor who goes into church on Sunday to preach a sermon that God does not exist will be looking for work on Monday, free speech rights or no." I agree. A person who makes elementary misstatements about mathematics may be entitled to do so, by their rights of free speech. But that in no way says that there will be no penalties. A student who does this may get a bad grade on a math exam. A professor who does so may be subject to disciplinary measures. The issue here is not academic freedom but simply academic standards. And I think these are occasionally at stake when a few professors simply substitute political propaganda for what is supposed to be scholarly work.
I don't need to debate a few anecdotes to see that there is a problem in some universities. In a field I know something about, namely the Arab war against Israel, I can see what material some professors assign in an assortment of universities. And I can see what is in the college bookstores on this topic. There's a manifest problem in quite a few of these universities.
The main point of Horowitz's book is that we should support an academic bill of rights, which he shows us in Appendix 1 of the book. These rights include ensuring "intellectual independence of professors, researchers and students." And they include demanding that faculty hiring be based on competence and knowledge of a field. In many areas, I think we already have this. But in some fields, I think competence may be of secondary value compared to "political correctness," and that is totally contrary to what ought to be the charter of our academic institutions.
While Horowitz wants to avoid political indoctrination by either liberals or conservatives, he makes it clear that the liberals look to him like the bigger problem at the moment. After all, in this book he reports that the number of "self-described `liberals'" in university positions outnumber the "self-described `conservatives'" by more than seven to one. Well, that may be a good point. But I think that the solution would be to recruit plenty of academics who might support such academic standards, and that means trying to appeal to a group of people, the majority of whom call themselves liberals.
I'm strongly against the indoctrination that Horowitz complains about. However, I think that it is not easy to make rules about it. Indoctrinators can often attempt to claim that you, not they, are in violation of your own rules. I also feel that "balance" is a tricky concept. In many classes, it is important to illustrate concepts by showing dissenting opinions. And professors should use their skills to determine what sorts of material to use in these situations. But at other times, the dissenting "opinions" are simply unreasonable, insincere, or gross propaganda. I'm not so sure what benefits there are, educationally speaking, to systematically assigning some of that subject matter in the name of "balance." To Horowitz's credit, that's not what he has in mind either.
I think this book raises some important issues, and I recommend it.
Horowitz's argument is fundamentally wrong. Here is a simple refutation of it..........2007-05-17
The view of "intellectual diversity" that Horowitz promotes should NOT be seen as a goal of education. The kind of research and teaching that goes on in universities should be guided by the pursuit of truth. Intellectual diversity, in the sense of a variety of viewpoints, is INSTRUMENTALLY useful for this goal of increasing knowledge, because more beliefs gives us a greater chance to defend our ideas and view different sides of an issue. But such diversity of beliefs should not be confused with the goal of truth or knowledge. Yet, this is the confusion that Horowitz makes when he promotes "intellectual diversity." People may be tricked into believing this argument because he appropriates the language of "diversity" from liberals' promotion of racial, gender, and ethnic diversity in affirmative action and hate speech codes. Yet, this kind of diversity is a diversity of identities, while the kind of diversity that Horowitz wants to promote in the classroom is a diversity of beliefs. The former is a plausible goal, while the latter is only instrumentally valuable, (because identities cannot be shown to be mistaken, while beliefs can be). Horowitz exploits the ambiguity between these two senses of diversity in order to make his argument. (Note: in this critique, I am drawing on Stanley Fish's critique of Horowitz's "intellectual diversity" arguments in an article in the Chronicle of Higher Education from 2004, and for the distinction of diversity of beliefs vs. diversity of identities, I draw on Walter Benn Michaels' The Trouble with Diversity: How We Learned to Love Identity and Ignore Inequality).
Book Description
A wake up call to lovers of liberty everywhere and a call to action to conservatives and Christians to defend the religious freedom envisioned and practiced by the founders.
Customer Reviews:
A well-deserved title on a timely subject!.......2007-06-02
Limbaugh has published an excellent account of the Left's unhindered hate for Christians and Christianity. An excellent title which every Christian should own and tell their friends about.
Powerful.......2007-05-11
Indeed, in the beginning it was Roman Catholics persecuting against Christians, and now its people that don't believe in God at all that persecute Christians. So the two extremes, once in the Dark Ages it was dictator popes, now its ACLUs and liberals.
But in the end, we have victory, do we not?
Need to be read by all........2007-03-23
Each chapter is filled with examples of conflict between secular liberals and the majority of American citizens with a Judeo-Christian worldview. Christians who are only exposed to mass media and who's pastors/priests, rabbis preach "safe" sermons may not be aware that we are in a struggle to maintain the America our parents grew up in. As one who attended university late-in-life, I experienced what Mr. Limbaugh has to say about liberal professors. Had I been fresh out of high school I would have been easy prey to their propaganda. Every American citizen needs the information available in this book. It can be troubling but ignorance breeds apathy.
Chronicles of anti-Christian bigotry.......2006-09-13
How can someone possibly manage to fill a 400-page book with example after example of Christians being persecuted in the United States? Only if there happens to be a whole lot of cases of Christian persecution. And that is just what Limbaugh demonstrates in this frightening but much-needed book.
He makes it quite clear that Christians are regularly being vilified, abused, threatened, maligned and discriminated against, especially by the ruling elites. Thus our media, our schools, our courts, our governments and our entertainers seem to have declared open season on the followers of Jesus.
Ironically, most of the persecution is coming from those who shout the loudest about toleration and acceptance. The various radical activists and trendy lobby groups are keen on acceptance - when it comes to their causes - but are quite happy to shout down, oppose and vilify anyone who opposes their agenda. Thus some of the main persecutors of Christians have been the homosexual activists, the PC brigade, and the radical feminists, along with their institutional supporters.
This harassment and persecution amounts to an undeclared war on Christianity. While we expect this sort of activity in atheistic nations and former communist regimes, it is remarkable to find it happening on such a large scale in America. Yet as the subtitle of this book explains, liberals are waging war against Christianity.
And as Limbaugh points out, this is even more ironic given the nation's founding. America was largely established on Judeo-Christian principles and beliefs, and its basic strengths and liberties spring forth from this soil. As a result, many of the freedoms and blessings enjoyed by Americans are being whittled away as the attack on Christianity extends throughout the nation.
The classroom is a classic case in point. The public school system has simply become a hotbed of secular humanism and anti-Christian bigotry. Limbaugh provides chilling examples of how our educational system is purging schools of any trace of faith.
Indeed, the examples are so numerous and so alarming that is hard to know where to begin. Consider just a few scenarios. In 1995 a US District judge in Texas said that any student saying the word "Jesus" would be arrested and spend 6 months in jail. A Vermont kindergarten student was expressly forbidden to say "God is not dead" to his classmates.
A teacher was rebuked for leaving religious literature in a New Jersey school faculty lounge, while literature trashing the `religious right' was plentiful and fully allowed. After the 1999 Columbine High School massacre, students painted tiles and placed them above their lockers to help in the grieving process. Around 90 of them were removed however because they contained inflammatory rhetoric such as "God is love."
Prayer of course has been banned, and textbooks even mentioning biblical characters are considered offensive and therefore must be removed. Choirs are banned from performing at school functions. And in the place of religion, we have a tidal wave of pro-homosexual activism, sex education, death education, values clarification and the like being foisted upon our hapless students. The examples are as numerous as they are mind-boggling.
Limbaugh rightly asks, what is happening to a nation that sees faith as an enemy and every sordid vice as a virtue?
Much of the suppression and hostility to the expression of Christianity comes from a faulty understanding of the so-called separation of church and state doctrine. Limbaugh examines this closely and shows that the founding fathers had no intention of eliminating religion from public life. The idea was merely to prevent one religion from becoming the state religion.
But the original intent of the founding fathers has been remarkably transmogrified by the secularists. Public education today simply bears no resemblance to how it first appeared. Indeed, Limbaugh reminds us that almost all of our earliest colleges were founded by Christians to train men and women in the ministry. Harvard, Princetown and Yale, for example, began as Christian training centers. Things have obviously changed markedly since then.
The courts, the media, the workplace, and the political realm also are full of anti-Christian bigotry. Limbaugh shows with countless examples that a once great nation based on Judeo-Christian principles is being shorn of any vestige of religion - much to our great peril.
Indeed, Limbaugh finishes his book with a review of the Christian heritage that helped to make America a free and prosperous nation. It was the Christian roots that gave rise to a great republic. But much of that is being undone by the secularisation process marching through the land.
Limbaugh reminds us that religious freedom is too important to give up without a fight, and that our Judeo-Christian heritage has served us well. The secularists may think their cause is progressive, but as this book shows, it is instead regressive, causing untold damage and destruction.
Forgive them, Father for the Conservatives know not what they do...........2006-07-13
Yes, I am a Christian, and I believe in all of the teachings of christianity. But I do not support the conservative's constant attack of democratic liberals.... it's the simple example of stereo-typing. I can garantee there are millions of atheist conservative republicans... I used to have a friend who was. This book is trying to make democrats look bad by using the atheists of the left against them. That's similar to Southern Black discrimination... everyone tought they were lower and disgusting because they used to be slaves. But that wasn't what they were on the inside.
Also, I think there should be a seperation between church and state, because otherwise falsified religious fanatics (Like Ann coulter and David Limbaugh)would rule the country and launch a crusade on islamic countries. These authors have no christian morals whatsoever, and Bush, who supposedly is some kind of "oil messiah" also doesn't. I can garantee Jesus watched the U.S. bomb Iraq, and cried, considering that the middle east is his homeland...
Also... Interacial dating is probably the best thing that has ever happened in our society. Finally, nobody even cares what color of the rainbow you are. One of the worst things anyone can do (other than kill someone) is criticize them for something they can't change, (or don't want to for that matter) So Ann Coulter, and David Limbaugh... and any other hatred-filled so called christians... read the bible for once!!! Christians are not supposed to hate. They are supposed to love. So, like hippies in the 60's said make love, not war.
Book Description
Former Secretary of Education Rod Paige gives the inside story of how teachers' unions are selfishly shackling our students to a failing education system, exposing the bullying techniques of the National Education Association-how these unions terrorize teachers, students, and their parents.
Customer Reviews:
Correct on Some Points, Misleading On Others.......2007-07-30
I am a veteran public school teacher and read this entire captivating book in one sitting. Paige does make some valid arguments about the corrupt, anti-child actions of teachers unions. Some of his frustrations I share 100%. First of all, I agree that unions make it very difficult for school districts to fire blatantly incompetent teachers. I know that because being a teacher myself, I have had to work with some of these teachers. They are a cancer on our profession and make us all look bad. For example, a few years ago, I taught in a classroom next to a teacher who would scream and yell at her 3rd grade children (mostly Hispanic) that they were "stupid and lazy." One day, we could hear her yelling such vicious things at her students that even a few of my own 5th grade students started crying. In tears, one girl asked me why that teacher "was allowed to treat little kids that way" and if I could go next door and ask her to stop. This teacher would also have some of the very lowest test scores in the district year after year after year, therefore bringing down the academic ranking of our entire school. Everyone, including the principal, knew how horrible this teacher was, but the principal refused to do anything because she knew that the union would protect this teacher 100% and that therefore any attempt to discipline her would be a futile waste of time and effort.
I also agree with Paige that because of union contracts, there is very little incentive, apart from a teacher's own conscience, to go "above and beyond" to help the students learn. The teacher pay scale applies to every single teacher, regardless of his/her competence or effectiveness, and is based only on seniority and continuing education units. Therefore, the veteran 30-year teacher who does the bare minimum will usually make at least TWICE as much as the new teacher down the hall who comes to work early, stays late, works hard, and does a darn good job teaching the kids. Paige cites research which claims that a teacher's effectiveness declines after he/she has been on the job for five years. If this claim is accurate, it is probably due to the fact that a teacher's salary does not correlate even one bit to how good that teacher is. Once a teacher has been in the system for a while, he/she begins to realize this and as a result, there is a decline in motivation to perform the job well.
However, I do take issue with Paige on some points. First of all, it appears that he wants to make teachers unions the "scapegoat" and implies that these unions are the main cause (if not the sole cause) for low academic achievement. However, although teachers unions should bear some of the responsibility, they are by no means the only ones at fault. In fact, one reason why we need a union is to protect us from incompetent administrators in our school districts. The elimination of tenure would allow a principal to arbitrarily dismiss a teacher for any reason, even if that teacher is the most skilled and competent in the school. Such reasons might include something as trivial as a mere personality conflict or the adminstrator's own personal and subjective opinions about the teacher's performance. Teachers would be afraid to "blow the whistle" on a corrupt principal or administrator for fear of being fired. I can tell you that it would be very difficult for me to give my full attention to teaching the children if I were consistently worrying in the back of my head whether or not I would have a job the next year to pay my bills and support my own kids. Still, the fact remains that tenure does protect some pretty LOUSY teachers, but completely eliminating it would be even more disastrous for our students. I would also suggest that in my exprience, tenure and unions are not the only reasons why so many incompetent teachers remain in the clasroom. Often, the school principal is also to blame by not properly documenting a teacher's deficiencies, as well as top school district administrators who will not support principals who choose to take steps to have an incompetent teacher dismissed.
Paige also suggests that teacher pay should be tied with student academic performance measures (i.e. standardized tests). This suggestion is based on a deeply flawed assumption that if students are performing at a high level academically, their teacher must be outstanding, and that if students are failing, the teacher must be lousy. The idea of "merit pay" would end up harming the very students it aims in theory to protect. If merit pay ever became a reality, most of the nation's best teachers would flock to school districts in affluent suburban neighborhoods that have the highest test scores. The students in low income areas, the ones who need good teachers the most, would be stuck with whatever is "left over." This is the inevitable result of a system that would penalize an outstanding teacher just because that teacher works in a school with high poverty or with students still learning English as a second language, while at the same time handsomely rewarding a terrible teacher who is lucky enough to teach in an affluent district with more socioeconomically privileged students who would still ace the standardized tests even if they had been taught by a fruitfly!
There are really no easy answers regarding these issues, but for Paige to place the blame squarely on teachers unions misses the point and ignores many other factors that have contributed to the failure of many of our public schools. Nonetheless, the book is well written, correct on many points (whether teachers or their unions like it or not), and very insightful. It is definitely worth the read for anyone holding a stake in the education of our children.
The Ball Is in the Union's Court.......2007-06-26
I have written many critiques of articles and books, but this book had my head swirling. I was a teacher and union building rep (at the same time) for many years and although I did not agree with everything the union did (who does?) I was never aware of the union's practices and history that Paige reports.
I have always considered a union necessary because of the practices and working conditions foisted on teachers by principals and district staffers (for the superintendent and board). Even though I walked picket lines and encouraged fellow teachers to join with full membership, I never protected an obviously-incompetent or racist teacher. In fact, I encouraged the principal to deal with him or her--to the consternation of my union Higher-Up. (You see, we teachers don't always blindly follow the union...or the administrators.)
One repeating problem in my school and district was caused by the upper-level administration placing on teachers the burden of one educational fad after another--all (to my knowledge) ending in failure and the waste of millions of the taxpayers' dollars.
And just like some teachers pass students along with no justification, so do some teacher college professors pass potential teachers who immediately or eventually fail our students, the community and the nation.
As Paige would seem to agree, I think teachers' unions should be only a business entity dealing with working conditions and pay. Leave the curriculum up to the superintendent (not that he or she has done a great job), or, as in charter schools, up to the local school.
Yes, I have once or twice been the subject of union harassment by one or more of the union's "blind" followers, but I was tough enough to handle it. And I didn't consider this treatment pervasive. Paige has revealed many negative practices by teachers' unions that need to be answered by them. But, remember, unions do not hire teachers (even if a certain board may be in a union's pocket, as Paige reports), so blame the boards of education, the administrator and curriculum developers at the administration headquarters.
I am not in sympathy with the idea--pushed by Paige--that teachers should receive merit or performance pay for a job well done. In my own classes I had students who learned much faster than others--and all of my students were poor enough to have a lunch subsidy. I worked very hard to get results, but a teacher in an area where most students are on level can get the same results or better and not have to put in the hours and effort I did, and he or she may receive merit pay, but not me. So, additional pay based on test scores (measured against a standard) is not fair to teachers.
Let me explain further. I say hire only quality teachers and check that quality not by how the students meet a standard, but how much progress the students have made toward that standard. If--and I'm not exaggerating here, especially for big-city schools--50 to 75 percent of my 8th graders enter my class not knowing their times tables (which means their math is hardly above grade 3) and they leave my room testing at the end of grade 6, they have made around 3 years of progress in one year! Yet, they are still 2 years behind being ready to move into grade 9. This means, they don't meet the acceptable standard for math. And I don't deserve performance pay. This is what I know and it is what teachers' unions know. "Merit" pay is a theory in the field of teaching youngsters. If it's put into practice and schools still don't improve performance that much (meaning some teachers may be fired), what are we to do, given that teaching has one of the greatest turn-over rates of any profession? The reality is that up to 50% of new teachers leave the profession within five years. I think supporters of performance pay are barking up the wrong tree.
If one is wondering if teachers need unions, one needs only read of the history of U.S. teaching to get an answer. (See my book, MT. HOREB: THE LITTLE WHITE SCHOOLHOUSE ON LITTLE DEER CREEK to get a short history; then check the bibliography.) We can't go back to the days when teachers were basically educational missionaries: Paige lauds those teachers that spend their days, nights and weekends (yes, cell-phone available) "serving" their students and indicating that this is what he thinks is a good example of dedication.
And for some interesting and moving labor songs (union history) get the lively CD "Classic Labor Songs."
I agree with Paige that for the sake of the students and the nation changes in most teachers' unions' non-student/teacher-oriented power needs to change. How those changes can be crafted to the benefit of all does need to be hammered out. Paige gives some of his ideas for improvement. How are the unions going to react? How are parents going to react? His book is against teachers' unions (of course, he will protest that, mildly)--though he does rightly praise a few union "mavericks," as he calls them. He says (after much criticism) that he thinks most teachers are praiseworthy, except that they are not quite so because of their blind allegiance to their unions who, he says, blinded them. He thinks he has strongly presented his evidence, now let the strong unions counter.
Let's hope this sorry state of affairs is soon corrected. It's not practical to think we can throw the babies (some unions, boards, teachers, teachers' colleges and even parents) out with the bath water (techniques for change), but let's do change the diapers (some present philosophies).
take back our schools.......2007-05-07
This book did an excellent job uncovering the danger our public schools are experiencing.It is a must read for all Americans.We must force our elected officials to address the teachers unions and make teachers accountable.The education system should reward excellent teachers and extract bad ones.The time is now.Encourage good business people to run for school boards.The system has to be changed to secure America's future.
I hope this is read by everyone who pays taxes to fund our public schools.......2007-04-25
This topic is so heated that it is easy for each side to accuse the other of bad faith and to make accusations that do not have substance. Let me say right out that I believe that nearly all classroom teachers are dedicated people who care about their students and most are good at what they do. Some are excellent and some are incompetent, but this is something that is known by everyone about people who work in every field of endeavor. Also, I am NOT against labor unions.
I do think they are most often brought about by bad employers, but there are also unions who are brought about by politics. And it is the mix of politics and union economic power that is as toxic as the mix of big business and politics. Each situation hurts society by stifling competition and moving the purpose of the organization from producing what it was created to do to providing jobs or economic rents for parties with the political power. Both are bad things and should be fought against, strenuously.
Neither is Rod Paige, the author of this book, attacking teachers or even unions in general. What he is against is that in our present educational system, the unions have linked their identity as the classroom teachers when they are something apart from them even while representing them. The unions have not only tremendous political power to stifle reform, they also have often hand picked and gotten elected the board that is supposed to negotiate with the unions in setting the rules and signing the contracts. How can this be good? And if the kids aren't learning, what is the use of providing jobs for the teachers in the first place? It would be similar to create a car factory that could not build proper cars, but all the energy went into issues surround those building the cars (that weren't being built well) instead of facing squarely why the cars were coming off the line in such poor condition. Obviously, in the real world such a company would face competition and, if it couldn't fix its problems, would simply go out of business. However, for some reason we feel we cannot allow competition to improve the quality of education our children receive. This craziness isn't the fault of the teachers, but of the system that empowers the unions to block meaningful reform and competition.
This is an excellent book that should be read by everyone interested in the power of the teacher's unions and how they behave in preventing meaningful change or even experimentation in trying to find a better way for educating our children.
Let me say again, I am PRO TEACHER. I think they need to be paid fairly. However, we have school systems to educate OUR children. They do not belong to society. They belong to us. We pay the tax dollars that fund the schools. We should have almost complete say in how our school systems are run, how they are funded, and the curriculum taught. Yet, we do not. This book can help you understand who has that power, how they got it, and why we can't seem to get it back. The author points out that when people are crying out for more funding, as they always do, they are really saying they are out of meaningful ideas. Money never fixes anything. That is true.
Here is a little thought experiment. People say we need to pay teachers more to get improvement by getting the best teachers. But when we raise teacher pay, do we get rid of the existing teachers and hire in new and better teachers at the new higher pay? Of course not! We just pay the existing people more. How does that get us better teachers? If you go to McDonalds and pay $2 more for a Big Mac, does it become a better hamburger? No. It is exactly the same. It doesn't change simply because you pay more for it. You would need to go to a place that serves better hamburgers at the higher price to get a better burger.
As long as the same people occupy their places they are not going to improve over increased salaries. There may be things we can do with infrastructure that can help. But simply stuffing the teachers' pockets or hiring more administrators (heaven forfend) will not educate our children more effectively.
The idea that we exist simply to provide tax dollars and do the bidding of the present education establishment while they make all the decisions about curriculum and get their advantages made into laws further disenfranchising those who should be in control of the school districts is obscene to me. But you will have to decide for yourself. This book can present you with great information about the present situation.
Book Description
The American middle class is on its deathbed. People who put in a solid day's work can no longer afford to buy a house, send their kids to college, or even get sick. If you’re not a CEO, you’re probably screwed.
As Air America Radio Host Thom Hartmann shows, this death is no accident. Like the Founding Fathers, patriots such as Roosevelt, Truman, and Eisenhower knew that economic opportunity and democracy go hand-in-hand. They believed in maximizing the public good and they worked tirelessly to build the strongest middle class the world has ever seen. But now, under the guise of “freeing the market,” conservative and corporate forces are waging a covert war against the middle class, dismantling policies like Social Security, Medicare, the minimum wage, and fair labor laws — the very safeguards that foster economic opportunity and citizen engagement. The result is an economic system designed to line the pockets of the super-rich, the impending extinction of the middle class, and a very real, very dangerous threat to democracy itself.
By exposing the systematic efforts to destroy the middle class, Screwed empowers readers to stand up, speak out, and reclaim their democratic birthrights.
Customer Reviews:
SCREWED.......2007-09-23
Thom Hartman should be a college professor teaching history and current politics. Easy to read and makes a lot of sense.
Huge Disappointment, Not Much Substance.......2007-09-19
After struggling to get through this book, I could not help but to ask, "where's the beef?" The book is marketed as a reading that discusses the control of America by the wealthy elite and corporations. However, this is not at all what I read. The author rambles on and on...it's pretty much yada, yada, yada. The analysis (if you can even call it such) is very generic. After learning that the author is apparently some talking head on radio, it now makes sense why the book is full of fluff. Radio personalities have motor mouths and simply do not have any expertise to write a book of this nature. They should save it to the real experts instead of trying to profit from selling their books during radio time. I will be returning this book back to Amazon. Don't waste your time on this book unless you like to read fluff. I gave it 2 stars only because the quality and effort is good. But again, substance is the key in my opinion.
Rethink.......2007-08-24
This book has moved me to re-think numerous ideas I have previously had, and will look at things differently from now on. Thanks Thom Hartman.
Passionate defense of the middle class against corporate power.......2007-07-27
Since the early 1980s, American politics have been meshed with the interests of large corporations. The result is a new form of "corporatocracy," which Thom Hartmann links to the woes of the middle class. He believes that the political Conservatives who pushed for privatization and special corporate tax breaks intentionally harmed the American middle class, which he calls the bedrock of democracy. While the U.S. government has helped corporations and wealthy citizens, it has increasingly taxed the public and killed social programs that fostered the middle class. Hartmann focuses on the U.S.' future, which, he says, depends on having a healthy middle class. He adds a historical perspective by quoting America's founders, who predicted the dangers of creeping corporatism, economic elitism and an incipient aristocracy. Although he is very assertive in his attacks on Conservatives and corporations, his approach is refreshing. We found this impassioned analysis interesting, but - fair warning - you won't like it much if you're a corporate lobbyist or a Bush supporter.
The most Important Punch was Pulled.......2007-07-04
Mr. Hartmann, in this full-bodied critique of the "American way" demonstrates a keen mind, a subtle reading of American history and uncommon passion and patriotic fervor. And although at times his critique has the smell of Marxist reductionism, and utilizes every liberal cliché on the leftist pallet, this is nevertheless an extremely well thought out piece -- a five star effort if ever there was one.
Only one punch has been pulled. It involves the same moral lacunae missed by most other critiques of the American way of life. For instance William Bennett, shamefully and unforgivably, in his several books specifically design to address American morality fails to mention it even once. Roger Wilkins in his fine attempt to square the circle about the deep hypocrisy of the founding Virginia Quartet, in his Jefferson's Pillow, at least tries to grapple with the problem. Even Morris Berman, in a book I like a lot, "Dark Ages: The Final Phase of Empire, failed to mention it as a factor in America's predicted demise.
It has to do with America's foremost political and moral blind spot: The corrosive effect that racism has had on the American psyche, on American morality, on American humanity, and on the way its continuous practice throughout most of American history has given permission over to narcissistic, entitled and self-appointed demagogic leaders to do as they please in refashioning the American mind, its worldview and its institutions to suit their own private needs. The Cheney/Bush administration is just the most recent example of what can happen when this phenomenon goes completely awry.
How is it indeed the case that most Americans, who engage in the long overdue business of introspection and self-analysis invariably fall prey to the same weakness and fail to see that the paradigm for screwing the white American Middle class was long ago fashioned and perfected in the incubator of racism -- one of America's closest held and most important values?
Arguably, the screwing of the (white) Middle class is (as perhaps Malcolm X would have phrased it) just a case of the racist, demagogic, and Fascist chicken coming home to roost. Now that the White Middle class has become America's "new niggers," all of the alarm bells are starting to go off. Only now has the silent majority begun crying that the neo-cons are grinding us into fascism. But the neo-cons are only culling the low hanging fruit available for the pickings in our sublimated but still very much race-sensitive culture.
Even the Constitution has embedded within it a moral compromise on the issue of slavery. A Civil War was fought primarily because the Abolitionist Quakers raised the issue in an effort to save their own moral souls and thus refused to allow it to be swept under the national rug. But when "real equality" did finally break out during the Reconstruction era, the American mind, neither North nor South could handle or embrace it. A century of Apartheid for Blacks was the answer to this dilemma of how to avoid full Constitution-mandated equality. It is this same bankrupt morality that continues to rule the American conscience. Witness the recent Supreme Court Decision effectively reversing the 1954 school integration decision. Curiously, its claims are made on the basis of "not discriminating on the basis of race."
A nation cannot be racist without first being at least proto-Fascist. That is why I believe a more detailed reading of American history would have revealed to the author that this pact with the devil of racism has made us vulnerable to manipulation by all sorts of political "low-lifes." Two of them currently occupy the Executive offices, and our Congress is now full of them as well - all because we elected them.
For god's sake, we went to war against Fascism and Europe's ethnic cleansing of Jews in a fully segregated army. Even the Jews in the U.S. Army saw nothing wrong with this! Many of the Post-WWII GI benefits that the author speaks so glowingly of and that launched the white middle-class, were not available to those of color who fought in the same foxholes that helped rid Europe of its racism and genocide against the Jews. How noble a nation does that make us?
Living side-by-side, year in and year out, for centuries with this kind of hypocrisy has had deep psychic consequences on the collective mind. The most important of which is the diminished humanity that results from the failure to face the issue of race, our greatest and most obvious inner demon. Another is that it makes a mockery out of our lavish claims of being committed democrats (little "d"). As we speak, we are spreading this same brand of democracy, which we never quite learned to practice at home, to Iraq.
It is this "hypocrisy gap" that makes us the laughing stock of the world and that leaves the back door open to manipulation by those self-appointed, entitled, low-life elites who have only their own private economic interests to protect.
They know all too well that if they throw a few racial epithets here and there doing the election cycle, reassuring the middle class that white supremacy is still the foundation of the American way, they gain permission and license to do anything they wish in our name. We all know the game: Every four years they manipulate our minds by giving us with one hand our daily bread of symbolically coded racist tripe; while with the other, and in full view, they rob our nation blind.
How can there be fairness for the white middle class, when the only paradigm of American culture is unfairness operating under the guise of fairness? The politician's job is to know the American mind. And for five centuries now what they know is that Americans cherish the value of racism well above all other values, including the Constitution.
Until we stop drinking from the poison cup of racism, this kind of manipulation will continue along the same dishonest path that our so-called "racial progress" travels. When friends from abroad ask how we could have elected an idiot like George W. Bush to lead the Western world, this is in my view is the only correct answer.
Five Stars.
Book Description
With the content of an authoritative reference and the excitement of a thriller, this history of the U.S. submarine war is one of the most informative and entertaining books written on the Pacific campaign. The author, a respected journalist and World War II submariner himself, is credited with providing a complete and unbiased account of what happened. When published in 1975, it was the first such account to detail controversial aspects of the American campaign, from the torpedo scandal to discrepancies between claimed and confirmed sinkings.
To get to the truth, Clay Blair interviewed scores of skippers, staff officers, and code breakers, and combed thousands of documents and personal papers. In addition, he thoroughly researched the development of the submarine and torpedo from pre-war to post-war times. As a result, he takes the reader into the submarine war at all levels--the highest strategy sessions in Washington, the terrifying moments in subs at the bottom of the ocean waiting out exploding depth charges, the zany efforts of a crew coaxing a chicken to lay an egg. He also exposes the reader to the jealous infighting of admirals vying for power and the problems between cautious older skippers and daring young commanders. Supplementing the text are nearly forty maps showing submarine activity in the context of every important naval engagement in the Pacific, more than thirty pages of photographs, multiple appendixes (including a calendar of submarine war patrols), and an index of over 2,000 entries. This is a work of great scholarship and scope that makes a timeless contribution to the history of World War II.
Customer Reviews:
All the Detail You Could Ever Want.......2007-08-23
What a read! I know it's history, but this is a page turner. The author just keeps bringing it on. I was impressed with the obvious volume of research, but the truly impressive thing is that he keeps your interest all the way through. An outstanding and extremely readable account of an underpublicized arena of WW II.
How the Silent Service strangled the Japanese Empire:.......2007-01-23
This is, quite simply, an outstanding history book. The depth of research done by the author is amazing. It is a blow by blow, patrol by patrol account of how these brave men put the Japanese war machine out of business. It is also exceptionally well written and extemely readable. It's one of those very few books that you can, literally, open up to any page, start reading, and become consumed with interest. This book belongs on any WWII naval bookshelf, and is, I believe, the definitive account of the Pacific Submariners' war.
The WW 2 Sub Warfare Encyclopedia.......2005-09-03
The is book has it all and says it all about the Use of Sumarines in the Pacific during WW2.
The good points about the book:
1. It complete describes every aspect of Submarines - torpedoes - engagements - personnel - strategy.
2. It gives a comprehensive amount of detail about the Commanders and Officers who fought in the Submarines - who did well and who didn't and why.
3. It gives a great amount of detail about the personnel feuds - the attitudes of the Sumarine Admialty in Hawaii - and In Australia. Their pettiness is detailed as well as their greatness. Both get equal measure.
The Weak points: All of the above detail gets a bit tedious and repetitive.
The real eye opener for for me was the fact thatin WW@ it was the submarines that did most of the damage to the Japanese Navy and they eliminated the merchant Marine - with one arm tied behind its back. The torpedoes they used on the boats were a failure for the first 15 months of the war. In reading the details of this issue - it is amazing that even with such incompetence in the Bureau of Naval Ordinance and with some doltish Admirals - that we did actually win the War.
Read the book and find out how we did it. Warts and all.
The silence is deafening!.......2005-08-27
This is a very detailed rundown of the USN's silent service during the Pacific war, and is a must if you are interesetd in the submarine operations, from a US perspective.
Blair also exposes, compared to post war analyses, the over, and dubious claims of ships sunk by the submariners, and a comparson with the U boats will reveal that the latter was much, much more successful, despite the lack of air and surface support, and its codes being cracked and read.
A comparison of Blair's 2 volume work on the U boats with this work will reveal his blatant biases against the Germans, no doubt a case of the inferiority complex.
Submerged in the Details.......2005-08-04
This is certainly a detailed and worthy survey of the US submarine war in the Pacific Theatre during World War II. It offers a great deal of information, much of which characterizes the area commanders with their personal goals, squabbles, and jealousies. It develops the story over the full reach of the war, from the frantic days following the attack at Pearl Harbor, the mostly ineffective first retaliations early in the war, the gradual build up of strength and experience in 1943, to the domination of the wolf packs and strangulation of Japan late in the war. The abominable ineffectiveness of American torpedoes and the denial and difficulty in remedying the problems with exploders and depth control are detailed. So are other interesting topics such as the replacement of skippers who failed to fulfill their assignments with the aggressiveness and tenacity required. All the various tasks assigned to fleet subs during the war are revealed as well and the different techniques encouraged in the various areas of operation. The role of the cryptologists and their essential efforts is also detailed. All this is good stuff and maybe the book deserves more than three stars. But I was overwhelmed by the shear tedium of patrol after patrol after patrol summarized with minimal detail or apparent purpose. This data could have been presented in table format with ease and clarity. The result is that the significant events, famous exploits, and heroic individuals are lost in this muddle of repetitive summaries. By book's end, it is difficult to separate the gallant from the routine. If it were not for signposts along the way from events familiar to me, it would have been even less differentiated. I've read of the Wahoo, Tang, Rasher, and Barb previously in excellent narratives, so their events stood out, as did the Tautog, Drum, and Cobia, subs I've visited. Otherwise, this narrative would have been even less discerning. An unusual style in military narrative employed here is another negative; the author chooses not to associate rank with individual's names. With the significance of rank in the military, this is detractive. I think the author would have served the story better with dramatic examples of incidents that characterize the heroic service performed by these crew and to feature leading events. Instead readers must try to discern this on their own.
Amazon.com
Due to the timing of its publication, Unfit for Command could be dismissed as the sort of controversial, loaded book typical in a presidential election year: Either courageous and necessary, or untruthful and malicious, depending on one's political point of view. Filled with interviews of men who served in Vietnam at the same time as John Kerry, the book poses the following question: "Why do an overwhelming majority of those who commanded or served with John Kerry oppose him?" (Note that the issue of "service" has sparked investigation into its definition--in other words, just how close was the interaction between Kerry and those cited in the book during Kerry's Vietnam tour of duty?) The charges leveled against Kerry in this book are severe and include filing false operating reports; lobbying for and receiving three Purple Hearts for minor wounds, two of which were self-inflicted; receiving a Silver Star under false pretenses; offering false confessions of bogus war crimes in both print and testimony; and recklessness in the field, including the burning of a village without cause or direct order. The book also claims that Kerry left Vietnam after serving just four months instead of the usual one year tour and that he returned home and accused his fellow soldiers of atrocities without offering any evidence, endangering POWs in the process. It is debatable whether the book will change any minds, or votes. Instead, readers will likely reach one of two conclusions: Either John Kerry grossly misrepresented his military service or the authors are spinning the interviews that they conducted for ulterior motives. There is a third option, however; readers will further investigate both sides of the debate, and by doing so, may reach conclusions independent of partisan extremes. --Brian Neff
Book Description
A shocking indictment of John Kerry by some of the men who knew him best.
Customer Reviews:
A Good Read Before the 2004 Election.......2007-03-09
I'm glad I read this book before the 2004 election. I'm a Vietnam era vet, but I had forgotten many of the events covered in this book. It was eye-opening to realize that the guy most of us thought of as a traitor back then, is now pawning himself off as a war hero and presidential material. It was good to see Mr. Kerry pay for the sins of his youth.
Whose Kidding Who?.......2007-02-01
America knows characters the likes of John Kerry! No surprise here!
Unfit for Command.......2007-01-11
I know in our world there are two stories to all conditions in life but if half of this book is true then John Kerry should not be in public office. What a disgrace to all service members who served our great country. He should placed on the same list as Jane Fonda.
Never more timely than it is today..........2006-11-02
God Bless Swift Boat. This book was a blessing when it came out, and it truly is a testament to this "man's" character today as it was then. As Kerry, who still can't come to terms with the fact that America simply did not want his sorry excuse for a life to lead this fine country, tries to figure out how to dig himself out of the hole in which he has dug himself by stating that the men and women of our nation's Armed Services (myself included, as I am a Captain in the USMC) are uneducated nitwits "stuck in Iraq,"....well, there is nothing more relevant than this treatise to serve as an example why this piece of garbage should never have been, nor should ever be, our Commander in Chief. It is clear that his contempt of the men and women of the military runs deep, just as deep as it did when he returned from Vietnam and began holding hands with Hanoi Jane.
I take great issue with his recent comments. Above all else that this so-called "man" represents and claims to represent, the bottom line is that he is a bonafide loser. He can't get past that, nor accept it. To degrade our nation's finest in the manner he did is simply atrocious, above and beyond being outright incorrect. Sure, it was a "joke" that went wrong. Whatever you say Johnny boy. It was clear to all what you meant and, more importantly, what you actually SAID.
But, I must heartily shake your hand for one thing. The one thing you seem to have accomplished is that you single-handedly set the Dems back even further for the upcoming election, just days away. Great job. Leave it to Kerry to do such a job. You know you've done wrong when you have the likes of Billy and Hilly rushing in to beg you to apologize...yet even still, you chose not to do so publicly, but simply, coward that you are, post a little note on your website. Pathetic. Thank GOD this trash was so devastingly beaten and never had a chance. He never will. He simply cannot see what lies right beneath him, and trips over his own feet simply by being the idiot that he is. He's an arrogant, petty, stupid, whining, petulant little man, who will be resigned to the footnotes of history as nothing more than the penultimate loser of a bid to the White House.
God bless the United States of America, God Bless our troops both home and abroad, and SEMPER FI.
Unfair.......2006-08-31
I think that this was an unfair attack on John Kerry. He would have been a better President than other people because he has actually seen action instead of asking his daddy to get him into the Guard and then go A.W.OL from it.
Amazon.com
The author of the provocative bestseller Who Stole Feminism? returns with an equally eye-opening follow-up. "It's a bad time to be a boy in America," writes Christina Hoff Sommers. Boys are less likely than girls to go to college or do their homework. They're more likely to cheat on tests, wind up in detention, or drop out of school. Yet it's "the myth of the fragile girl," according to Sommers, that has received the lion's share of attention recently, in hot-selling books like Mary Pipher's Reviving Ophelia. When boys are discussed at all, it's in the context of how to modify their antisocial behavior--i.e., how to make them more like girls.
This book tells the story of how it has become fashionable to attribute pathology to millions of healthy male children. It is a story of how we are turning against boys and forgetting a simple truth: that the energy, competitiveness, and corporal daring of normal, decent males is responsible for much of what is right in the world. No one denies that boys' aggressive tendencies must be checked and channeled in constructive ways. Boys need discipline, respect, and moral guidance. Boys need love and tolerant understanding. They do not need to be pathologized.
Sommers eviscerates feminist scholarship by Harvard's Carol Gilligan, the American Association of University Women, and others. Hers is feisty, muscular prose and fans of Who Stole Feminism? will delight in it. "There have always been societies that favored boys over girls," she writes. "Ours may be the first to deliberately throw the gender switch. If we continue on our present course, boys will, indeed, be tomorrow's second sex." That rhetoric may err on the side of alarmism, but Sommers' ideas are full of common sense. She essentially urges parents and educators to let boys be boys, even though their "very masculinity turns out to be politically incorrect." The War on Boys is sure to set off a fiery controversy, just as Sommers' previous book did--but it should also find a big audience of readers who become fans. --John J. Miller
Book Description
It's a bad time to be a boy in America. As the century drew to a close, the defining event for American girls was the triumph of the U.S. women's soccer team. For boys, the symbolic event was the mass killing at Columbine High School.
It would seem that boys in our society are greatly at risk. Yet the best-known studies and the academic experts say that it's girls who are suffering from a decline in self-esteem. It's girls, they say, who need extra help in school and elsewhere in a society that favors boys. The problem with boys is that they are boys, say the experts. We need to change their nature. We have to make them more like...girls.
These arguments don't hold up to scrutiny, says Christina Hoff Sommers in this provocative, fascinating book. She analyzes the work of the leading academic experts, Carol Gilligan and William Pollack, and finds it lacking in scientific rigor. There is no girl crisis, says Sommers. Girls are outperforming boys academically, and girls' self-esteem is no different from boys'. Boys lag behind girls in reading and writing ability, and they are less likely to go to college.
The "girl crisis" has been seized upon by some feminists and has been suffused with sexual politics. Under the guise of helping girls, many schools have adopted policies that penalize boys, often for simply being masculine. Sommers says that boys do need help, but not the sort they've been getting. They need help catching up with girls academically. They need love, discipline, respect, and moral guidance. They desperately need understanding. They do not need to be rescued from masculinity.
Customer Reviews:
Excellent, Straight Information about Critical Issues facing our boys........2007-09-11
A Brave, insightful, fully footnoted and supported, rational, objective, critical, and eye-opening piece of research and literature, Christina Hoff Sommers not only writes beautifully and engaging but also leaves little doubt as to what has happened in our educational system and society at large relative to recent approaches to gender differences in our educational system and society.
She is brave in her approach and as this is clearly indicated as she has gone through all the necessary steps to research her material, this included attending conferences and symposiums of those that do not share her views. While this places her in difficult situations it is clear that what she leaves with is a more objective view, either tempered by her adversaries rationality or fueled by their irrationality (more often the latter).
I highly, highly recommend this book.
Another fantastic book from Christina.......2007-08-21
Although 6 years old now, this book was a breakthrough book which intelligently exposed what all thinking people knew already - that many of the American male youth are being irreparably harmed by a movement which, although having in its history won the essential rights anyone would demand in a democracy, has degenerated into a hate-machine, chewing up funds and lying to maintain both its existence as well as the employment of countless thousands of women in the feminist infrastructure.
Sadly, it is evident to me that what Christina describes for the US is evident in just about every Western country. A short anecdote will show what I mean. As an English person in Germany I have assisted teachers in marking papers for final examinations, where I was shown the official model answer for the exam, the State's answer, if you will. One concerned a very short story by an American author, quite a well-known one but whose name I forget right now, which I must briefly relate:
A man gets off a bus and a woman recognizes him. She runs up to him, almost wanting to kiss him, but he acts distanced and unfriendly. We find out through the narrator though, that several years before she had left him for another man, and he had been absolutely heartbroken. Then, as luck would have it, he had met the love of his life, married her and they were now happily together with two children. She however, had since broken up with her new partner. The story ends with them making some non-committal comments to each other before they separate.
Incredibly, the official answer provided by the German Federal Education Department stated that Bill was in the wrong here, he was the bad one for not valuing friendship! She had only tried to be nice to him and he had cold-shouldered her, ignoring her betrayal and resulting heartbreak. I then quickly imagined their analysis of the story if we reversed the sexes exactly: a woman steps off a bus, and man recognises her. He runs up to her, getting really close and even looking like he wants to kiss her. How dare he! This man left her for another woman and broke her heart a couple years back, now he sees her in public and thinks he can just throw himself at her, she who destiny rewarded after his betrayal with a loving husband and two children. The cheek of it! She rightfully cold-shoulders him, they make a few non-committal comments and disappear. Would the German Education Department then point the finger at the woman, saying how unfriendly she is? Hardly likely. What they'd now doubt ask is how audacious can this man be, to leave a woman like that and then expect when seeing her again to just run straight in to her arms and kiss her. This would have been the correct analysis from the start, but the criticism of women is not allowed in the education system here. German men have it especially bad, as because of their country's 20th century history, any discussion of THEIR own rights or open criticism of women can lead them to be associated with the political right-wing much more than in other countries. Thus they teach the kids that they all equal at school, then they leave the school and the boys go to the army for 10 months, or perform a Civil Service, working in hospitals, old age homes, etc, doing mainly heavy lifting and carrying work. The girls are free to go off and do as they wish. Crazy. Yet few boys complain at this injustice. The girls would be going crazy if it were reversed! Yet they don't care, and just embarrassingly shrug off any attempt to talk about it. I would urge all these young men, to demand from a future government that respects their rights this time back in payment or early retirement. Like Christina shows with the US, boys around the world are up against it in a matriarchal system which threatens to emasculate them, and all praise to brave women like Christina for helping to highlight this war, which unlike Susan Faludi's mythical one, has practically been declared.
Scratching the surface..........2007-06-19
I gave this book one star simply because I have not read it yet, but I have ordered it and can't wait to read it cover to cover. I am a father of two daughters ages 7 and 13 and we have lived outside of the US for many years so I can't really say that I know what's going on in our society from the 'parent of boys' POV but I do think this is a timely topic which needs more exposure and discussion. Parents don't be silent! Stand up for your boys since they cannot fight for themselves without being labeled as a "problem".
I can tell you that I am an 18-year military veteran and the same anti-male attitudes described by the author and most of the reviwers here have woven their way into America's armed forces. If you know a male friend or family member who has been in the military for 5-10 years or more ask them and they will confirm what I am saying. What was up until very recently the final holdout of the uber-male machismo stereotype (once a neccesary and preferred trait in traditional combat roles but now deemed unecessary in our tech-war scenarios) has been replaced by a brady bunch version of itself due to our sycophantic military brass and their cowering civilian policymakers caving in to the ultra-feminist-PC male bashing movement. How can we give a guy a gun to "kill the enemy" and sensitivity training about cultural, gender and sociological roles at the same time???? Talk about a paradox!
So sadly, the old cliche about "join the military-it'll make a man out of you" just does not apply in today's sissified, hyper-sensitive summer camp edition of the armed forces. Just wanted to let everyone know that Public School is not the only government institution that is shortchanging and marginalizing boys and men in the 21st century. I'm glad I'm retiring before the next big war.
This is an excellent book, all the "progressive" educators should read it.......2007-05-19
Actually I read this book over a year ago, but was recently promted to write a review, after having read some biased (against boys) statements in a couple other recent books (like David Denby's "Greatbooks").
Hoff-Sommers makes an excellent argument for the case, that we need to rethink the way we are "educating" the boys in our primary and secondary schools. It is easy to spew forth truisms like "boys need recess", as some authors do, but Sommers goes into a great amount of detail and fact-finding, to show basically that the branch of feminism which I call "ideological" is largely responsible for the decay of boys' education, and of boys in general. The book has the added benefit, that it (intentionally or not) shows that ideological feminists are unethical, hateful people who will go to any length to destroy boys and men, including inventing or distorting facts, manipulation of the media and politicians, using double standards, taking either side of an argument as it suits their purposes, outright lying, intimidation, and ideology masquerading as "scholarship".
So basically in buying this book, you are really getting two books: a work proving that education of boys needs to be reformed, and an accurate critique of feminism.
the book should be one of your books about rising a boy these days.......2007-02-15
I did not go to this book in the first place, the title and the approach seems too controversial and not a good source of rational thinking about a subject. I personally prefer more balanced, more scientific arguments. After reading a lot on the subject I finally reached the conclusion the best book to read was "Why Gender Matter" by Leonard Sax.
However, then, somebody recommend me this and I read it. It totally worth is price. Cristina Sommers made me reflect about the fact that politic and market forces make arguments look very scientific and nice even when they are not. Science is as good as the source and the intentions of the persons doing the analysis and backing the data.
She clearly and successfully make the point that certain political agendas implemented in our school were based on a controversial foundation and finally resulted in a negative force for our boys. You do not want to rise boys as girls nor viceversa. The 70s are gone. Fortunately, is not 1955 again. But is not the 70s. Sommers let us imagine a balanced 2010 were not only gender becomes accepted as it is but also character education, honor, discipline ..etc, things that were lost in a too-progressive, Rousseau-oriented education that is not getting results.
Books:
- Microelectronics Packaging Handbook, Part I: Technology Drivers (Microelectronics Packaging Handbook)
- Miracle in the Andes: 72 Days on the Mountain and My Long Trek Home
- My Boys Can Swim!: The Official Guy's Guide to Pregnancy
- Negative Horizon: An Essay in Dromoscopy
- Nineteen Minutes: A Novel
- Nineteen Minutes: A Novel
- Nineteen Minutes: A Novel
- Once Upon a Crime (The Sisters Grimm, Book 4)
- Option Volatility & Pricing: Advanced Trading Strategies and Techniques
- Pedal Steel Guitar
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- His Brother's Keeper: A Story from the Edge of Medicine
- Divine Interventions: True Stories of Mystery and Miracles That Change Lives
- Virgin Earth: A Novel
- A Door into Ocean
- Amazing Grace: William Wilberforce and the Heroic Campaign to End Slavery
- Cracking the AP Chemistry Exam, 2006-2007 Edition
- Bearing Witness: A Resource Guide to Literature, Poetry, Art, Music, and Videos by Holocaust Victims
- Heintz Art Metal: Silver-On-Bronze Wares
- Wild Belfast: On Safari in the City
- Letters from a Distant War: Vietnam from a Soldier's Perspective
Aviation
| Military
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Sea of Thunder: Four Commanders and the Last Great Naval Campaign 1941-1945
Untold Valor: Forgotten Stories of American Bomber Crews over Europe in World War II
The Few
Ship of Ghosts: The Story of the USS Houston, FDR's Legendary Lost Cruiser, and the Epic Saga of her Survivors
Six Frigates: The Epic History of the Founding of the U.S. Navy
