From Whitewater to Paula Jones, Mr. Tyrell has chronicled an unflattering portrayal of our president and his scandals. With wit and sarcasm this author leads the us through a rise to power beginning with an unlikely poor boy from a sleepy hollow called Hope, who grows up to become the Rhode scholar at Georgetown and Yale Law School, Governor of Arkansas, and finally President of the United States. This is a book for the serious political scholar or persons interested in modern day presidential politics.

This is one of the weirdest books I've read in a long time. Written by R. Emmett Tyrrell of American Spectator fame, this has to be one of the most scathing attacks on Bill and Hillary Clinton ever written. I gave it five stars because it kept me in open mouthed awe throughout the entire read, as well as illiciting huge belly laughs over some of Tyrrell's word play, which can be truly brilliant. This book isn't a knee to the Clinton groin, it's a shotgun blast to the Clinton groin.

The book starts out with the L.D. Brown story. Brown was a close confidant of Clinton when he was Governor Clinton of Arkansas. Brown, with Clinton's help, attained a job with the CIA. Brown quickly became entangled in the Barry Seal/Mena drug trafficking operation. Brown is an important figure because he can link Clinton into the drug operations. This part of the book is essentially the same account that can be found in Ambrose Evans-Pritchard's "The Secret Life of Bill Clinton". If Brown is to be believed, this is a devastating indictment of Bill Clinton and sets the tone for Tyrrell's examination of the Clintons.

The rest of the book traces Bill's ascension to the White House. We get an account of Bill and his education at Oxford and Yale, where he quickly hooked up with what Tyrrell calls the "Coat and Tie Radicals", which are those New Left hippies that smoked dope and engaged in Marxist thought on the weekends, but spent the rest of their time carefully cultivating their public image so as to land good positions in government, law and corporate America. Tyrrell shows that during the time between the 1960's and the 1990's, these Commies never changed their attitudes or beliefs. They simply waited through the Reagan years for their chance to impose their warped values on America. Their beliefs can be summed up in what Tyrrell calls the "kultursmog", a choking mess of touchy-feely and Marxist/Socialist ideas that clouds traditional American values. Tyrrell continues his assault on the Clintons by showing their financial scams, their rabid pursuit of power over everything else, how they are products of the corrupt "Ole Boy" network of Arkansas politics, and how the first year of the Clinton presidency, 1993, was an utter disaster for America. Tyrrell outlines all of the scandals and flubs that made the Clinton presidency the most corrupt and inept administration in American history. Tyrrell also looks at Clinton's childhood, throwing aspersions on Clinton's mother Virginia, who is portrayed as a loose woman without any morals. He also points out that we can't be sure who Clinton's father really is.

A separate chapter offers a treatment of Hillary Clinton and reveals the true colors of our illustrious First Lady. She is exposed as a closet Communist who clerked for a well known Marxist lawyer who defended the Black Panther Party. Hillary also edited a journal at Yale that was extremely hostile to authority figures. One edition depicted police officers as racist pigs who should be killed. Hillary's infamous behavior is also closely detailed. Apparently, our First Lady has a temper problem, and likes to heave objects in fits of volcanic anger.

Tyrrell explodes the Clinton mythos and shows them to be two black holes in power suits. The portrait painted here reveals them to be grasping, petty, manipulative power seekers without a shred of decency. They dragged America through the mud, and the country will forever be stained by the Clinton legacy. And this was written in 1996, well before the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal broke.

It's important to note that Tyrrell uses an astounding vocabulary throughout the book. Words such as foozle, avuncular, and lumpen predominate. The style is also extremely snide and can get pretty ugly. Tyrrell pulls no punches in this treatise, and liberals will scream bloody murder while reading this, if they can finish it in the first place. It is, without a doubt, a polemic, and should be read accordingly. I have to give it five stars for its sheer audacity. I'll read it again.

I'm sure Mr. Tyrrell would be pleased to know that Steve Kangas not only read the book before his suicidal attempt to assassinate Richard Scaife (no doubt inspired by all the compassion and love of such Clintonistas as Sidney Blumenthal, James Carville, and Larry Flynt), but even gave it a star.

A fairly funny commentary on the state of politics at the end of the Clinton era. Shearer attacks pretty much everyone, but no doubt Republican partisans will be offended anyway, they seem to get upset about any criticism of their leaders, no matter how tepid or humorous. Generally, this book will not make you laugh out loud, and you will not feel compelled to treasure it always, but it is a fun, easy read and provides plenty of amusing insights and comic asides. Of course, you might want to keep on your bookshelf just to make your Republican friends go beat red on the sight of it.

Harry Shearer has written, not just another book about people who hat Bill Clinton, but a book about why. I was impressed by how the author was able to convey a message of disgust with clear and precise facts.

While some people will find this book offensive and some will hate it outright, this reader thinks that most people will find this book a real pleasure to read. Shearer has a great knowledge of politics and how the political world turns and he displays this in every page of the book.

Shearer brings the reader little known facts about key Washington figures. Shearer allows the reader to choose whom he likes and whom he doesn't. The book is good. Easy reading from beginning to end. This book will keep you asking for more.

While Shearer gives the reader a quick insight about racism, the culture war and the generation gap, he does so with a unique blend of satire and humor. I think for the price you will make a great choice.

Humorist Harry Shearer is a great writer who informs, amazes, teaches, and enrages, and does it all with the funniest, cleverest language of any writer today -- in the tradition of Robert Benchley. There's more genuine insight in this brief book than in a year of newspapers (or a decade of MSNBC). So clever, Harry. So smart. So write another, please. Gavin de Becker, Author The Gift of Fear

I am writing these comments in the early part of August. The real question, though, is how will this book be perceived the day after the national election in November. It is virtually certain, whether it's fair or not, that Hillary Clinton's attempt to become New York's next U.S. Senator has been destroyed by the charge of an anti-Semitic remark of over two decades ago. Is it true? Also, even if the accusation is accurate, does Mrs. Clinton deserve forgiveness? One could engage in much abstract speculation and moral inquiry into the larger issues of Hillary Clinton's predicament. Nevertheless, in the practical realm, she is in dire straits. The First Lady needs solid and overwhelming Jewish support if she is to have any realistic chance against her Republican challenger, Rick Lazio. Recent polls already indicate that Hillary Clinton is unlikely to regain the trust of a sufficient number of Jewish voters to salvage her campaign.

I am uncomfortable that there are not more witnesses to confirm this allegation. Yet, isn't Jerry Oppenheimer simply doing his job? Some people will question Oppenheimer's credibility because of his National Enquirer past. That argument is simply fallacious. The National Enquirer is admittedly a scandal sheet, but it is still highly regarded for meticulously and thoroughly double checking facts before approving them for print. A former campaign worker has gone on record with his incendiary claims. How can the media not report the story? Shouldn't we be outraged if these charges were ignored? I think that a fair and objective person, regardless of how they feel towards Hillary Clinton, must conclude that the media are placed before a rock and hard place when forced to decide how to handle such a dilemma. The reader may notice that I am ignoring the other aspects of Oppenheimer's book. I am doing so because in the long run the anti-Semitic charge is the only reason why it will be remembered. Historians may very well refer to this book as the one that demolished the Clinton family's last hope for political and perhaps even personal redemption. The impact of this book far outweighs its intrinsic value. I am sure that we will still be discussing it many years into the future.

Because the author goes into so much detail about both Bill and Hillary Clinton's childhood and personal families, I was able to get a fuller, more human picture of them. It was very helpful to me, as I have been honestly unable to comprehend why anybody would trust or like either one of the Clintons. Reading this gossipy book with all its quotes from childhood friends, stories from Hillary's mother, brothers, cousins; the friends of Bill's mother, etc. honestly helped me to flesh out these people and realize that they are not, after all, monsters. They have become something much different from what they envisioned in their youth because of their willingness to sacrifice personal principle for political power, but they are not monsters.

I appreciated learning that many people liked Hillary at Wellesley and Yale Law School because she was genuinely friendly and did many kind things for others. I could imagine why Bill fell for Hillary and vice-versa, and how their relationship began as a genuinely passionate one.

Likewise, I found it very believable that Hillary said something to the effect that she would never be able to go through all the rigors of politics if she didn't know that "they were saving the world." From the beginning of their relationship, Hillary believed that Bill was a semi-messianic figure who would attain the presidency, that he and she would be able to get into the government and create lots of positive (to her mind) changes that would help lots of people. Just like any messianic figure, people would oppose him. Unfortunately, that's a delusion. If she had been less idealistic and more realistic, she might have demanded faithfulness and either forced him to change or divorced him. Either of those outcomes would have spared us from the Clinton presidency. At any rate, I liked this book very much.

Unlike Peggy Noonan's trashy tome about Hillary Clinton which I lambasted in another review, this book was excellent, being factual, carefully researched and well written. The author delves into family histories of both Clintons, which helps the reader to better understand how their upbringing shaped their personalities. Oppenheimer interviews numerous friends and relatives who were close to the Clintons, and disputes some inaccuracies found in other Clinton biographies.
Of all the books I've read on Bill and Hillary, this one portrayed them the most objectively and fairly. It is not a one-sided, gossipy tell-all but a careful study of the Clinton's marriage and an analysis of their very diverse, but complimentary personalities: Hillary as a strident, intense, ambitious perfectionist from the Midwest and Bill, an affable, laid-back, shrewd, womanizing Southern boy. Their strengths helped them to achieve their goal of the Presidency; but their weaknesses proved to be their undoing.
Theirs is not a marriage of love but one of raw political ambition and power, a business partnership in which a deal was struck before their nuptials. Of the two, Hillary comes off the worse. Her foul mouth and vicious "go-for-the-jugular" attacks against opponents and friends are legendary. Bill, clearly eclipsed and overpowered by his strong-willed wife, resorts to behaving like an oversexed school boy, unzipping his fly at the drop of a hat. Possibly his excessive womanizing is because Hillary castrates him on a daily basis, so poor Bill has to make sure his equipment grows back and is in working order....hmm, that sounds like a familiar Greek myth, only instead of entails being ripped out by a vulture and growing back overnight, we have...,well you get the picture.

This book is out of print, but if you can snare a used copy here at Amazon.com, you're in for an intelligent, enjoyable read.

This is the "Absolutely, positively, without a doubt everything you want to know about Whitewater" book. I really do not think there is one shred of info left out, the Independent Prosecutor would be hard pressed to put together such a detailed and complete history. I doubt even the combined recollection of all the people involved know as much about Whitewater as what is in this book. That should give you a pretty good idea of what the book is about, the author does through in a little about the campaign, travel gate, Vince Foster and a few other early Clinton scandals, but the true heart of the book is the Whitewater investigation.

The book does not flow as quickly as his last book "Den of Thieves" nor is it as gripping. It is, however, a very well constructed and researched book. If you are interested in this particular issue then I have not come across a book with a better non-partisan telling of this story. If you are looking for an overall detailed account of the election or the first four years in the Clinton White House I would suggest the Woodward books "The Agenda" and "The Choice" and the Elizabeth Drew book "Showdown: The Struggle between the Gingrich Congress and the Clinton White House".

When I opened this book I was hoping for all the juicy details on the Presidents dirty deeds in Ark. In some ways I got what I wanted and I didn't. The book has a ring of truth and fairness about it. On the one hand Stewart lets the President off on the Whitewater charges but spills the beans on all the other dirty little secrets. Those who want to see Mr Clinton fall will be disappointed with this writing and those want to see the President exeronated will also be disappointed. But then again the truth is usually disappointing. Read the book, it's a good read. But be prepared to wade through a lot of detail to get to the truth.

If anyone is still interested in what the fuss was all about, they should read this. Blood Sport is written totally objectively and deals with all the players involved in every Clinton scandal except for Monica, which broke after publication.

The book details the business partnerships the Clintons had with the McDougals from the 1970's on the 1990's and its fall out. The story stretches from Arkansas to the White House and even goes a bit into the suicide of Vince Foster.

Stewart makes no judgments as to whether any impropriety occurred in any business dealings, so this is a good place to start for an objective reader who wants to make up his own mind about the whole sordid mess.

Dr. Thompson's coverage of the election of the first rock 'n roll president is a hoot and a half. From a hapless George Bush reeling from the loss of strategist Lee Atwater (RIP) to smooth Bill Clinton's hustling his way into the voter's hearts and minds, Thompson was a fly on the wall for it all.

Thompson went out of his way to make himself a part of the whole story, whether anyone wanted him to or not. It's clear by many of the memos and faxes reproduced here, many didn't. But that's part of the fun. Thompson can make politicians wiggle on the hook like no one else can.

Better Than Sex is a fantastic time capsule of the 1992 presidential campaign--even predicting that women just might be Clinton's downfall. Included also is an unkind obituary for former President Nixon and the legacy he left behind.

The book is subtitled 'Confessions of a Political Junkie' and it is required reading for any political junkie.

I absolutely love the writing of HST. Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas is, without a doubt, one of the most important books of the 20th century. On the Campaign Trail '72 somehow managed to get me interested in politics. Hell's Angels made me want to buy a motorcycle and rip down the california coast at midnight. But...Better than Sex is a dull, vapid, anorexic account of a dull, vapid, anorexic campaign. Approximately half of the 240 page book is made up of scribbled-out faxes and strange illustrations. Which is not necessarily a bad thing, but I would much rather read 240 pages of non-stop HST ranting. For whatever reason, the Dr. has elected to use the phrases "Ho, ho" and "bubba" at least once on every page, or so it seems. I've read other reviews that state that HST has lost his edge, that a lifetime of rum, cocaine, mescaline and adrenochrome has begun to catch up with him, but I hesitate to write Him off as a aging has-been quite yet. But after reading "The Proud Highway", one must wonder how HST himself would have reacted to a book such as "Better than Sex" if he were still a money-hungry book reviewer.

Not exactly a great book, but no one else could describe the '92 campaign better than HST. It was interesting to find out that he wanted to run for sheriff of Pitkin Co, Colorado on the Freak Power Ticket. Seeing catch phrases, ho ho and bubba on almost every page was a bit much, but at some moments I believe he may have got it from Clinton himself. Selah. Thompson also adds personal faxes to this book that show his mind is still the same as it was when writing Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. Some have said the years may be catching up with him, but how much do you actually think he had to work with on the '92 campaign? He did what he could with it, but it was a little boring, but nothing about the '92 campaign was really worth writing a book about. Maybe some more into the great minds of Admiral Stockdale and H. Ross Perot? That would have made the book even more boring, but considering what he had to work with, this book is a decent account of getting the "redneck" from Arkansas into the White House, bubba. Maybe he should have waited a while and added a little about the use of "interns" in the White House, and we would have seen the great Dr. we all know and love!

The account of Mr. Woodward (this time authorized!) regarding the quest for, and conquest of the White House by William Jefferson Clinton, made me realize very much about the man, and the politics that surround US Government. Though not usually my cup of tea (the book was a gift, I felt obligated!) it did reveal the machinations of the Federal Machine, and how you've got to do a little back rubbing for everyone to get anything done. That fact that Clinton and his team did so almost masterfully made the book worth reading right there. As with any President, or politician for that matter, Clinton did fall on his face a sufficient number of times, whether they were personal or political. His intelligence and charisma was artfully brought through by the author in a most skillful way. A must read for anyone trying to understand Clinton or his White House.

If you're looking for a critical analysis of the first 100 days of the Clinton White House, this is not the book for you. Woodward's unimpeachable ability to get the most minute human details about his subject merely presents the scene; he leaves it to others to blow rhetoric hot and cold about our controversial President. Woodward places the reader inside the White House, where you feel the frenzied pressure of trying to pass an economic reform package. And for a political junkie, Woodward's fly-on-the-wall style of reporting is great fun. Congress emerges as a hodge-podge of competing special interests and constituencies, and you feel the White House's frustration with it's own ignorance of Byzantium On The Potomac. The Outsiders from Arkansas receive their crash course in Washington politics, and it's not pretty. With every compromise struck, two hard-won bargains are lost. Yet the players never seem petty, but merely hostage to the varied yet insatiable demands of the American electorate. These are men and women of conscience and duty, yet must work in the most competitive of environments. After reading this account, one cannot help but reconsider his last diatribe about the bums in Washington: Woodward eloquently and entertainingly presents the burdens The System imposes on our elected officials and their staffs. All in all, an entertaining, surprisingly fast read

The Agenda written by Bob Woodward, pertains to Bill Clinton's first year in office. It's mostly about the battle and struggle for the new (at the time) president to get his budget and economic recovery package passed through Congress. It's amazing, but I never realized how much of a tough job it is to be president.

Shortly after winning the presidency in November of 1992 over incumbent President George Bush Clinton soon had to both come to grips and realize that his work was cut out a lot more for him, than he, or his campaign staff could've ever realized. Ultimately, he had to accept the fact that he would have to do some drastic compromising from his campaign promises. Clinton of course campaigned to be a "New Democrat" who would restore the economy to the forgotten middle-class and overturn the Reagan-Era greed of the 1980s, by investing in jobs, education, and health insurance reform. After meeting with Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan, he soon realized that it wouldn't be so easy. As it would turn out, taking bold action to reduce the overwhelming national deficit would become the top-notch priority of his economic recovery plan, and would hog up most of his budget. Therefore his beloved domestic investment agenda would have to be sacrificed. Including his promised tax-cut for the middle-class.

So even before, let alone after Clinton took the oath of office, Clinton had his work cut out for him. He had to realize
early that his approval ratings would sink miserably and there would be disenchantment among his strongest supporters, let alone the American people. In many ways, two camps developed in his White House. There were the fiscal conservatives such as Robert Rubin, Leon Panetta, David Gergan. Then there were those from his campaign staff who wanted him to continue with his campaign pledges of investment such as Paul Begala, George Stephanapolis, and James Carville.

Greenspan's influence over the new president was amazing. Although it was from a neutral point of view, Greenspan
made Clinton understand how it was crucial that Clinton tackle the deficit. Or else long-term interest rates would never come down and the economy would never take off. Without the economy taking off, no way would Clinton ever be able to get back to doing the things that he was elected to do, let alone re-elected in 1996. Clinton had to come to accept that he would have to sacrifice many things, among them, his political popularity, but know that the long term effects would pay off dividends for both him politically, and for the US economy.

Fortunately for him, it did apparently work out for the best, and he did (with the extreme help of a Republican Congress
balance the federal budget in 1997) reduce the deficit and gave us a budget surplus. What should also be strongly considered is that he did this, at the behest of cutting the DOD and the intelligence community, which contributes to events such as September 11th, 2001.

What is also amazing about this book, is that Woodward gives you a fly-on-the-wall view of the battle to pass this
budget through both the House and the Senate. It also gives you the word for word account of a bitter phone conversation between Clinton and Nebraska Democratic Senator Bob Kerry, in which Clinton tells Kerry to go f--- himself, when Kerry refuses to vote for his budget, which turned out to be the crucial vote.

As it would turn out, Kerry would vote for it, making it a tie. Gore then gave the over the top vote and the budget was
passed.

This book was very, very good, and that is why I was able to go through it so quickly.

-Nicholas J. Vertucci

Clinton had a lot of potential. He is a brilliant man, a Rhodes scholar. He has a charming personality and an incredible memory. However, Clinton betrayed American in many important ways. He loosened restrictions on nuclear missile guidance systems, satellite technology and anti-satellite technology such that China and Russia now have the ability to destroy the defense systems of the USA. Clinton did this in exchange for campaign contributions from the Chinese as well as from companies such as Lorad and Hughes. For more info on this topic one can read Betrayal by Bill Gertz of the Washington Post. During Clinton's tenure, American morality has reached new lows. He removed restrictions against the pornography industry such that porn is readily delivered into American homes with cable and satellite TV. He pardoned cocaine dealers in exchange for payoffs. He pardoned the FALN Peurto Rican terrorists who killed people with bombs. He did not respond to the earlier bombing of the WTC by Bin Laden. He did respond to the bombing of the USS Cole. He did not pursue the connections of Timothy Mcveigh to Bin Laden in the Phillipines. He denied the US Army Rangers and Delta Force tank support and gunship support in Mogadishu such that 18 Americans were killed. Then he ran out of Mogadishu when a marine was dragged thru the streets. This sent the wrong message to terrorists. The implication was that Clinton was not willing to commit significant military strength and that he would run if any American casualties occured or there was the potential bad publicity for him. He lowered the dignity of the office of the American Presidency by having a sexual affair with a Monica Lewinsky while he was being investigated for sexual abuse of Paula Jones, Gennefer Flowers and Katherine Wylie. For more about his routine habitual lying, one can read the books by his top advisers who all quit working for him out of disgust. These books include A Political Education by George Smirnotopuoulous, Eyewitness to Power by David Gergen, Saturday Night Bill and Sunday morning William by Dick Morris. In the words of the Clinton's former secretary of labor Richard Reich who also quit out of disgust said of Clinton, "He is an utter disgrace". Behind the scenes, Clinton ran a campaign of terror, threatening the numerous woman who considered filling sexual abuse charges against him as well as destroying the lives of CIA, FBI, USA navy/ONI members who contradicted his claims that the Chinese, North Koreans, Russians and Iraqis had all violated their weapons agreements with the USA. He did his best to ruin the USA military in many ways, including trying to take away the black beret of the Rangers and give it to all army troops. The irony goes further in that he allowed a deal to go thru that the berets would be made in China. This at a time when China was openly threatening the USA with nuclear weapons over Taiwan.

While I began this book believing that African Americans are too inclined to support any white leader who isn't blatantly racist, I ended by at least acknowledging that President Clinton went further than previous presidents in adressing the complexities of race. It's a credit to the author that he presented a balanced view of a complex subject and represented a broad and diverse group of thoughtful individuals. This book makes you think. I highly recommend it.

While there may be countless books written about the lives of presidents from an historical perspective, "Bill Clinton and Black America" is a fresh look at the life of a president from the very mouths of his contemporaries.

Interviews with people from all walks of life give the reader an up close and personal look at Bill Clinton -- the man. It's candid, compassionate and real. Excellent read!

In page after page of "facts" based on assumptions, presumptions, and lies, he produces a tale of flimsy accusations of improperity against a woman who is much brighter, quicker, and kinder than her male counterparts. It was easily apparent that he manufactured much of the "facts."

I read this book when it was first issued. The more time passes, the less impressed I am by the work.

At the timethe book was issued, I noted what must have been a very painful episode in the subject's life, at least as Brock reports it.

According to Daivd Brock, for her entire life, Hillary Rodham's mother urged her daughter to excell at academics. Yet when Hillary received the singular honor of giving the commencement address at her college, an event that brought her national attention at a young age, Brock reports that Hillary's mother was not in attendence. That struck me as what must have been a particularly bittersweet moment in the young Ms. Rodham's life. To work so hard for approval and then receive none.

Several years later, in a biography that received cooperation from the First Lady, Gail Sheehy reported that it was Hugh Rodham, Hillary's beloved father, who had skipped her famous commencement address in lieu of other pressing activities.

Mistaking the subject's mother for the subject's father strikes me as a rather serious factual error for a biographer.

I disagree with the other reviews of this book. It is even-handed only if you consider damning with faint praise to be even-handedness. Brock's thesis is that while Bill Clinton is a sleaze bag; Hillary is a sincere committed radical--sort of a Emma Goldman with a law degree. While he does at times acknowledge that a double standard has been applied to the Clintons, as compared for example to the Bushes, he repeatedly denigrates Hillary by resorting to guilt by association. He trots out every associate she has ever had who has been involved in any liberal or left-wing cause and gives you their background in lurid detail. According to Brock, Hillary's intellectual development stopped in college or law school. I await his new book to see whether he really is ready to write an even-handed appraisal of the current political scene. In this book, he assumes that the liberals are naive or out to destroy basic American values. For example, he assumes that there wasn't merit at all to the Vietnam war protests or that anyone could actually believe that the war was both immoral and not in the interests of the United States of America.--Arthur Amchan

This book is not partisan as some reviewers have claimed. Itis pragmatic.

It also seems strange to judge the book solely bythe highly debatable point of whether or not Posner violated the Canonof Judicial Ethics in writing it.

Should Clinton have been impeached, and if impeached, convicted? Richard Posner says the question is unanswerable. So why read this book?

This book shows how an outstanding mind thinks through important legal and moral issues where existing law and precedent are unclear or inconclusive. It is highly critical of almost everyone involved, including Republicans, the Supreme Court, Clinton's defenders, William Bennett, the TV pundits and 'intellectuals' who commented on the case. The four hours I spent reading this book were far more interesting, clarifying and valuable by far than the many hours I spent in front of the TV during the year or so of the crisis. Too bad this book wasn't available in the early months of the crisis. A lot of misleading and inaccurate information and thought could have been sorted through much more easily.

Here are a few of the many interesting points made by Posner, with which I agree:

1. It is on the ground of disrespect for his office and for decency in the conduct of government that the most powerful case for impeachment and conviction could have been pitched.

2. A President has a duty to avoid becoming enmeshed in a scandal that is likely to weaken his effectiveness. In running that risk, for wholly personal rewards, the Clinton exhibited a high degree of personal irresponsibility. That was a personal failing. But the avoidance of scandal is also a public duty - a precondition to the effective discharge of the President's other public duties.

3. A pragmatic decision-maker wants decisions to be based on an assessment of their probable consequences. In legal cases, and a fortiori in impeachment, which is only quasi-legal, this is a legitimate or at least common approach when the conventional materials of legal decision-making, such as precedent or a clear statutory or consittutional text, yield no direction. Since it is unknowable whether the good consequences of impeaching and removing Clinton outweigh the bad, the pragmatist would lean against impoeachment.

4. Those who claim that the failure to impeach Clinton makes what he did OK, or puts him 'above the law' are just wrong. He remains subject to the ordinary processes of the law, whether during or after his term.

5. To keep on lying after no one believes you does not mislead, but it shows contempt for truth and truthfulness.

6. Clinton made a travesty of the religious rite of atonement by asking for forgiveness and absolution without offering to incur any cost.

A number of reviewers of this book incorrectly state that Posner takes a partisan, Republican view of the Clinton-Lewinsky affair. I'm a Democrat who voted twice for Clinton, but this characterization of this book is completely untrue. This book is pragmatic, not partisan.

Should Clinton have been impeached, and if impeached, convicted? Richard Posner says the question is unanswerable. So why read this book?

This book shows how an outstanding mind thinks through important legal and moral issues where existing law and precedent are unclear or inconclusive. It is highly critical of almost everyone involved, including Republicans, the Supreme Court, Clinton's defenders, William Bennett, the TV pundits and 'intellectuals' who commented on the case. The four hours I spent reading this book were far more interesting, clarifying and valuable by far than the many hours I spent in front of the TV during the year or so of the crisis. Too bad this book wasn't available in the early months of the crisis. A lot of misleading and inaccurate information and thought could have been sorted through much more easily.

Here are a few of Posner's more interesting views, with which I agree:

1. The volume and brazenness of Clinton's lies are impressive. As Posner says, to keep on lying after no one believes you does not mislead, but it shows contempt for truth and truthfulness.

2. Clinton made a travesty of the religious rite of atonement by asking for forgiveness and absolution without offering to incur any cost.

3. The Supreme Court should not have allowed Paula Jone's suit to proceed during Clinton's presidency.

4. The avoidance of scandal is a public duty of the President, since it weakens his effectiveness in discharging other public duties.

5. Failing to convict Clinton does not send a message that what he did was OK, or that he is 'above the law'. He remains subject to the ordinary processes of the law, whether during or after his term.

Judge Posner has written a concise and accurate analysis of the impeachment and trial of President Clinton, and included thorough and accurate assessments of all parties involved. Judge Posner concludes that the articles of impeachment filed against the President were indeed within the realm of high crimes and misdemeanors; additionally, Judge Posner argues that, contrary to popular spin, the actions of the President went beyond that of a private matter, bringing shame, disgrace, and disruption to the executive office -- actions which by themselves supported impeachment. Of most interest, however, is Judge Posner's excoriating portrayal of all parties involved. A president, who deliberately lied to the nation, his family, his cabinet, and his supporters, in a blatant effort to obstruct justice. A prosecutor, who failed in his effort at developing a strong case against the president, provided an overly lurid account of the case, and then buried the record in mountains of evidence. A house of representatives, incapable of developing accurate articles of impeachment, and then failing miserably in the prosecution of the case in the senate. A senate, so inept as to have never developed appropriate rules for an impeachment trial. And finally, partisan groups from both sides, who in the urge to defend or defeat the president, daily set forth on a path of lies and insinuations, often with the sole purpose of damaging the characters of individuals under media glare. The book is well worth reading, and is an excellent reminder of the damage an impeachment trial can do. Readers who are further interested in impeachment generally should consider Michael J. Gerhardt's The Federal Impeachment Process: A Constitutional and Historical Analysis.

I thought this was an excellent case for the defense. It is a disjointed book, to be sure: a new 30-page introduction precedes a series of prior published articles. The result is that you find yourself going over familiar ground over & over. I understand this was necessary to get the book out in time for the impeachment trial (and to ward off claims of 20-20 hindsight). Still, it's a viewpoint worth reading about. There are plenty of books out with the other side - we can see Ann Coulter on any number of food fight talk shows (and absolving Richard Nixon in the process on the O'Reilly Factor). As much as I disliked Dershowitz during the OJ trial, this was a better effort.

Early on, Dershowitz informs his readers that he is a supporter of Clinton. Nevertheless, he uses several opportunities, throughout the book, to criticize Clinton for undermining people's civil rights. Perhaps ironically, Clinton himself may be on the receiving end of such policies in the form of Starr's questionable methods for gathering evidence. At any rate, this book is presented in a diary fashion, with a certain amount of interpolation and commentary provided with each entry. As a non-lawyer, I found Dershowitz's explanations intriguing as the intricacies of the law are expounded. As a pure legalist, Dershowitz criticizes the Clinton defense as being politically driven, the end result of which has been a presidency in jeopardy for legal reasons. The book is not so much a defense of Clinton and his actions as it is a story of how Dershowitz would have conducted Clinton's legal affairs during each critical phase of this crisis. I find his arguments compelling, although I'm not sure who wouldn't in hindsight. Overall, I think the book is very readable and I believe it gives non-lawyers insight into the legal system and why things are setup the way they are.

If you are among the many in this country who harbor an irrational, violent hatred for Clinton, then buy the books by Anne Coulter, Bill Bennett, Howard Kurtz, Micheal Isikoff, Christopher Hitchins, George Stefanopoulis, Monica Lewinsky, Gennifer Flowers, and George Will, or just read any book which does nothing but confirm what you already think about Clinton and the state of the country. And then be sure to write an angry review of Dershowitz' book here without reading it, and then recommend one of the books from the Clinton haters. But if you are a sane, normal-thinking individual, then buy this book by Alan Dershowitz and you may actually learn something new.