This is one of the best biographies I have ever read and it is the an incredible work done by authors. They describe in detail all relevant facts about the Pope and, based on these facts, the authors explain his ideas and his influence under the modern church. In this book, the reader will be able to understand many of John Paul II's thoughts and actions that were performed and will be performed by him during his period as a Pope. A book worth reading in order to understand the real man behind the Sant Peters Throne.

I was sorry to see that this has gone out of print. The late Jessica Mitford, author of the American Way of Death, was a fine investigative journalist and just plain good writer. In Poison Penmanship she gleefully shares her adventures in the trade. She was fearless and zestful; obviously enjoyed the ruckus she kicked up, whether taking on the "death industry," the penal system, or a restaurant review. She is missed; so is this book.

"His Holiness" stands as the best biography of Karol Wojtyla, later to become Pope John Paul II and the first Pope of the third millennium. His papacy has revolved around inceessant travel and an effort to re-establish orthodoxy in the Church through rigid supression of dissent led by Joseph Ratzinger.

This incessant travel has led John Paul to be seen as a mdeia superstar, and at the same time is strong doctrinal stance has led to him being seen by some as a restorationist and as a successor to Pius XII rather than John XXIII.

This book avoids many of the problems of other John Paul biographies. Bernstain and Politti write with more clarity than, say, Tad Szulc, and they do a very good job of explaining the contradictionas that really are to be seen in the Wojtyla papacy: the authoritarian church leader versus campaigns for justice in the wider world. Most aspects of Karol Wojtyla's life up to the time of the book's printing are described most effectively - such as the conclave and how Wojtyla came through against several Italian candidates.

This is the book to read to know John Paul II.

Best book I ever purchased. Well written and very informative.

"The roots of all he felt and did as pope, in terms of both Catholic dogma and geostrategic doctrine were to be found deep in the soil of his native Poland. As a youth, like many of his compatriots, he had steeped himself in the lore of Polish messianism, the idea that Poland was the Christ of the Nations that one day would rise again to point the way for all of humanity." So begins this spellbinding account of Pope John Paul II, and the history of our time.

Not since Malachi Martin's "The Keys of This Blood" has there been a book that so meticulously traces and makes clear the global ambitions of the Catholic Papacy. Carl Bernstein's excellent reportage combines with the sometimes irritatingly unctious contributions of Italian journalist Marco Politi to write a book that is filled with so much high-drama and intrigue it is difficult at times to keep in mind that this is not a novel, but real life history being made right before our very eyes.

Perhaps the most compelling chapters in the book have to deal with how Karol Woytila as pope, conspired with Ronald Reagan and his Cabinet, which was virtually made up of all Catholics, to assit Poland's Solidarity movement, and hasten the demise of Communism.

This book copiously documents how the United States Government, together with organized labor, made common cause with the Vatican to conduct a modern-day Berlin airlift of sorts to keep Soldarity alive during the days of martial law in Poland.

This pope's purely political side is brought out for all the world to see. Not since Malichi Martin's book has there emerged a portrait of this pontiff which shows just how cunning, politically motivated, and hegemonistic he really is. John Paul II is portrayed as being a "very important asset" to our government. "And what was in it for the pope," a deputy of Secretary of State Alexander Haig was asked. "Something he probably wanted more than anything else...I think he is a very political man-what this gave him ...was that he felt he had a high-level intimate relationship with the world's most powerful country. He was a player. That's what it gave him."

In this book emerges a portrait of a pope that many people haven't seen, or do not believe exists, and that is the portrait of a man on a mission to establish worldwide, what has been established in his native Poland; a world dedicated to the Virgin Mary, governed under the auspices of the Roman Catholic Church.

A person would only have to review the history of Catholic absolutism in history, especially in the Dark or Middle Ages, and in the period from the 1870's to the Second World War to see how truly frightening this prospect is. This book clearly shows that John Paul II is the Deus Ex Machina in foreign affairs. This book is every bit as compelling as a novel.

This is an amazing account of the last few months of the Nixon presidency leading up to his eventual resignation. The first half of the book deals in larger chunks of time, but by the time the second half begins, each chapter encompasses a single day. As in ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN by the same authors, the reader may find the onslaught of different names to be intimidating; fortunately, the cast of characters list at the beginning of the book helps a lot. All the people involved are treated with a lot of respect, and their motivations are made very clear throughout with only a few exceptions.

Unlike ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN, this is not told from the viewpoint of the two authors. Through interviews and other methods, the two journalists have reconstructed what they believe those last few months to have been like. The result is an amazing and richly detailed look at the aftermath of one of the most important scandals in recent US history.

One of the real strengths of this book is that it allows the reader to see how the scandal affected many of the different people that were close to the President -- his aides, his family, the lawyers defending him, congressmen, fellow Republican leaders, etc. We see how his team tried (and eventually failed) to fight the accusations made at President and how his staff continued to get the work done even as he retreated farther and farther into himself.

Before I read ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN and THE FINAL DAYS, I really didn't know too many particulars about the whole Watergate scandal. I highly recommend this pair of books to anyone looking for detailed, yet highly readable sources of information.

Well, Bob Woodward has a bestseller again -- "Bush at War" debuted at #2 on the New York Times bestseller list today. What's Carl Bernstein up to? Never mind about that. "The Final Days" is still not to be missed, over 25 years since it, too, became a best-seller. The country has moved on to other pressing political matters, but interest in the unravelling of the Nixon Administration remains high. Books speculating about the identity of Deep Throat seem to come out annually.

"The Final Days" is marked departure from "All the President's Men", the first Woodward/Bernstein book and obviously the one that put them on the map. Whereas "President's" was the inside story of two journalists chasing down a story that led higher into the U.S. government than they ever dreamed imaginable, "Final Days" is a step back, since neither Woodward nor Bernstein (nor Deep Throat, for that matter) appear as characters. The focus turns to Nixon's family and close political advisers. Many of the oft-mentioned names remain relevant today: Pat Buchanan, Diane Sawyer, Henry Kissinger. It's also about twice as long as the earlier book, but reads just as quickly.

"Final Days" is divided into two parts. First is a general overview of the first two years of the Watergate Crisis, this time told from the view of all the President's men rather than from the Washington Post. Next is a dizzying chapter-a-day sequence of the final 17 days of the Nixon administration.

In the midst of the research are some surprisingly interesting detours. Nixon's final foreign journey as President is to the Middle East. A funny aside details how the White House press office had to avoid mentioning Israel on the same page of press releases naming other countries in the region, to avoid offending Islamic governments. Also amusing is the lengthy description of Nixon son-in-law David Eisenhower's obsession with fantasy baseball.

25 years, numerous Presidential scandals, and a war or two later, the undoing of Richard Nixon remains riveting and required reading. The Woodward/Bernstein books blaze with a you-are-there immediacy, and even the overuse of passive voice doesn't slow down the narrative. Every hour of mind-numbing research underpinning the book has paid off, because the story told is seamless. There's dramatic tension to every decision Nixon makes in his final month in office: to resign or stay in office? To surrender his private tapes, or continue the legal battle? Nixon himself even becomes a sympathetic figure, as the debilitating nature of his phlebitis is explored.

Perhaps you're busying reading Woodward's latest effort now. Perhaps you're numbed by his almost annual hardcover tomes about the private lives of American presidents, each less relevant than the last. At any rate, "The Final Days" is a detour well worth your time, whether you're on the left, the right, or above all that. It's surely no coincidence that Barbara Olson's excoriation of the Clinton White House bears the same title.

"All The President's Men" & "The Final Days" are an essential part of political history: They are also an essential part of journalism history. Watergate & the revealed power of the media to topple a president changed journalism -- and inspired a generation to enter the profession. ... Read "All The President's Men" first ... &, as you read it, know that the better book is still to come. "All ..." is vital to understanding what happened; "Final Days" is a far superior book. ... "All ..." reads as though the authors were still shell-shocked from what had happened & what they -- in their 20s -- had participated in. "Final Days" is a much more mature & calmer book. It offers a better understanding of what Nixon did wrong than the first book. Its portrait of Nixon is far superior ... even empathetic. ... I am a Republican (& a journalist) & someone who finds much to redeem Nixon ... & I thoroughly enjoyed this book, which is remarkably unbiased & deft at presenting even the least likeable participants as human. I also was jolted at some of Nixon's extremes, which I had prefered to forget because in some ways (i.e. foreign policy) he was a great president. ... Aspects of this story are remarkably dated ... would Nixon have fallen now? (Reagan didn't. Clinton didn't.) Are we as easily shocked? As naive about power? Do we even fantasize anymore that our leaders will be flawless? ... The comparisons with Bill Clinton are striking & obvious. Would Clinton's story have ended differently if he had been president 25 years earlier & before Watergate & Iran-Contra? ... For a real immersion in the story through popular culture, read the two books in order & see the movie of "All The President's Men" & see Sir Anthony Hopkins' brilliant performance in "Nixon." ... "Tragedy" is an abused word, but Nixon's story WAS a classic tragedy: Hero undone by fatal flaw.

It says a lot about the character of Richard Nixon - his suspicion bordering on paranoia, his bitterness, his self-pity, and his intransigent resentment toward everybody who he perceives as an enemy (which was probably almost everybody), that he had to rubber-stamp the commitment of a crime in order to win an election he could never have lost anyway, by approving the break-in of the Democratic national headquarters in Washington in the summer of 1972.

A black night-watchman finds a door lock suspiciously taped over and calls the police. The police notify the press. And two young reporters from the Washington Post begin to investigate what looks like a third-class, amateurish crime and end up ripping the lid off the biggest can of worms in American history.

We watch in fascination as Woodward and Bernstein follow their mentor Ben Bradlee's precept of "If you can't find a woman in the story, look for the dough". We follow them as they chase the trail of laundered "dough" all the way into the White House. And along with them, we peel off the outer leaves of the artichoke one by one - the underlings who committed the crime, their superiors who planned it, the higher-ups who authorized it, until the ugly center stands exposed: the Chief Executive as Thief in Chief. Whether or not Nixon knew about the break-in in advance is irrelevant. What matters is that once the news was out, he did everything possible to cover it up, and by doing so, sank himself irreversibly in a morass of crime and deception.

The book reads like a classic detective novel, with the intangible presence of Deep Throat looming over all. Did he really exist, and if so, who was he? The question still puzzles us. Woodward and Bernstein have been playing cat-and-mouse with us over his identity for the last three decades. It's just one of the threads in this story that will be left dangling for years to come.

Woodward and Bernstein emerged from the Watergate scandal as American heroes. To say they brought down the Nixon administration may be overdoing it; but they certainly tore the cover off a malodorous snake pit and brought it kicking and screaming into daylight.

What is largely forgotten is that in the summer of 1972, Bob Woodward and Carl Berstein were two young but complete nobody reporters assigned not to political reporting but the Washington Post's Metro section. When they were assigned to cover a "fourth rate burglary" at the Watergate Hotel, it changed the course of their careers and of American History. It is no exaggeration that had more conventional Washington political reporters been assigned to the Watergate story, it might never have been exposed in enough detail to bring down Richard Nixon. This book is an American classic. Though it lacks historical perspective on the Watergate affair, it is vital to anyone who wants to understand the greatest American political crisis of the Post World War Two era.

Time has not dulled the impact of "All the President's Men". It's been thirty years, now, since the thwarted break-in at the Watergate. Most of the higher-ups in President Nixon's administration have passed away, and subsequent generations reared on Iran-Contra and Whitewater may not even remember what the fuss was about. But from the very first page of this book, history becomes life and events rush forward to the inevitable conclusion that still seems impossible today.

Woodward and Bernstein's reporting is the major thrust of the first half of "President's". We watch both reporters work late into the night, interviewing reluctant and/or anonymous witnesses in an attempt to find out just why the Watergate burglars had connections with the White House, and how far up the political chain of command those men were connected. Along the way, mistakes are made and a reputations are wrongfully derailed. But the story -- the crimes and the subsequent cover-ups may have indeed been directed by the President of the United States himself! -- takes on a life of its own, and Woodward and Bernstein become witness to the defining story of an era.

Much of "All the President's Men" has passed into legend, especially the unrevealed identity of Woodward's executive branch contact known only as "Deep Throat". The Watergate players to this day still debate just who Deep Throat was -- John Dean seems to publish a book on the subject every five years. Time has proven most of the accusations correct -- for an interesting exercise, try comparing Woodward's and Bernstein's discoveries with the corresponding daily entries in "The Haldeman Diaries"). The book gives so few clues as to make the exercise nearly impossible, even to those of us who've read all there is to read about Watergate and Nixon. Was it John Dean? Alexander Haig? Perpetual Nixon apologist Bill Safire? The answer will be made known in my lifetime, but I would like to think sooner rather than later.

Although 30 years is a short time in American history, in politics it can be a lifetime. The meticulous triple and quadruple-checking of the Washington Post staff has given way to the unfounded accusations that support a half-dozen instant political bestsellers. Certainly no-one uses the passive voice quite as monotonously as do Woodward and Bernstein. These defects, however, are minor: the antics of Colson and Liddy and Haldeman and even the amusing capers of Donald Segretti remain fascinating in print even today.

When you're done with "All the President's Men", I recommend "The Final Days" (by Woodward and Bernstein) and "The Haldeman Diaries", and then the rebuttal books put out by Nixon staffers such as Haig and Erlichman.

I have just read Carl Bernstein's book, Loyalties and found it fell far short of what I would have expected from a man of his high journalistic reputation. His father did not want personal vignettes put into the book and yet Mr. Bernstein had lots of private comments about his parents that I felt were an invasion of their privacy. He also spent a lot of time on his own life at that time which really was secondary to the tumultous events his parents had been involved in. There should have been more input into the causes and events during those McCarthy years and what he did put in was episodic and not put together clearly. I also did not quite understand his attitudes regarding his parents' activities and membership in the Communist party which he put them on the spot about. He doesn't make things too clear. I felt he was too aware of making an impression with his writing abilities.

Bernstein talks about getting his butt kicked at school after his folks had to testify before Nixon/McCarthy, and it was in the following mornings papers.

Helps prove that the media is full of commies, and that if you are someone the media loves to hate, you are speaking the truth.
If you are a media darling, you are a commie.

Read this and see it for yourself.

People old enough to remember Watergate, first hand, have told me it was never revealed that Dick Nixon, Hoover, and McCarthy, were after Bersntein's folks, and had surviellance of Bernstein's bar-mitzvah, (to see who was on the invite list.)

My only complaint is all of the Yiddish in the book. The Communist Party must have been exclusivley Jewish, or at least at the mover and shaker level. When Bernstein's Mother was organizing counter-demonstrations to the Rosenberg's (Atomic spies) Death Penalty, she would talk with her family, and other party members, and some of it is related, ver batim. This includes the Yiddish, and Carl doesnt translate it, so I am still clueless as to what the exact phrase was.

It's a minor annoyance however, as you certainly get the flavor that this guy was less than objective from the time he was very little when it came to his desire to whip up the public against Nixon. Remember when Nixon was reelected he had over 60% approval ratings. Ratings as high as the media loved to tell us about comrade Clinton.

Check it out, very informative as to who the players in American Communism were, what their goals were, and how they acheived them.

This book could encourage independent thought among media watching American consumers, but let us not get to hopeful.
Also check out "Silent Coup" from Len Colodny and Robert Gettlin.

I love this book and have never understood how and why it went out of print. Maybe it helps the reader to be from Washington, DC. Carl Bernstein grew up around here, went to school around here, and his parents and family were very much part of the local radical scene, so when he names names and locates businesses, schools and houses, it's all walkable for those of us who live in the District. But beyond the local interest, Carl Bernstein gives us a strong sense of what it was to be part of a radical fifties family. This was a time when conformity was so nuanced, so as a kid Bernstein was both proud and ashamed to have his mother's picture appear on the front page of a major newspaper when she was arrested for picketing the Five and Ten. (People forget how much the Communist party contributed to the Civil Rights movement in some parts of the country during a period when there was still a risk of job loss for many who wanted to protest segregation.)

In short, this is a minor classic, much underrated and well worth reading. I teach history and I'd happily use it forone of my classes if I could just get enough copies for my students! My students who have read have all had good things to say.