This book is a perfect example of the attacks by the network of right wing zealots who have dedicated their lives to destroying Bill Clinton by innuendo, false testimony, and other slanderous devices. Interesting as evidence of the political paranoia eating away at our democratic institutions.

I read this book after the fact(Bill's second reign) and can only hope the next time someone of his kind runs for President, the American people pay attention.

The only significance of this book now comes from the need to constantly review, as a preventive measure, what Bill Clinton et al did to the Constitution and every branch of government as well as the Justice Department. It is not hyperbole to say that the country could not have withstood another four years of this kind of massive corruption.

This is a thoughful analysis, with no rhetoric, no paranioa. I wish I had had this book when the presidential campaign was in full swing. Mr. Clinton should not be head of garbage collection in (name of your least favorite city goes here), much less President of the United States of America. Clinton was a vain, cold man, who didn't know himself and had little or no conscience. He was never really in it to help the disenfranchised, but to feed his own ego. Read this book to find out.

I thought this work would give me some insight to the minds of persons who hold positions of power, sadly it did not. Though I am not skeptical about psychology, I find too many persons fashioning themselves experts when they learn only elements of diagnosis. Fick would have us think that he can analyze an individual from meida reports; though it may be fun it is dangerous, destructive and unprofessional.

It is unprofessional and ridiculous that a writer would attempt a book as this one and claim "professionalism." Although Fick did put in his disclaimer that he never saw "the patient;" he failed to disclose that his real purpose in writing The Dysfunctional President was to make money selling the book.

The former president certainly disappointed us, but more disappointing was the highly educated American People letting themselves be swept away emotionally in a media morality play. Fick, playing up to this, saw a way to make money while public interest in the whole affair has been waning.

I found the book presenting misguided aspects of the Diagnostic and Statistics Manual. All too often, these played with by folk playing "blaming others." In Fick's writing, out of context descriptions of human behavior filled the pages of a book that purports to educate. The work reads as the verbiage of "failed twelve-steppers,"while giving energy to detractors of Bill Clinton. This kind of analysis is really masturbating on a mental plane opposite that on an official plane. Sorry Fick, though I read your writing, I didn't buy it or buy into it. Your work only encourages people Clinton haters and those who imagine themselves expert in a serious profession that should be left to serious professionals.

As a rule, I am scornful of books that attempt to psychoanalyze public figures from afar; indeed, I am skeptical about psychology in general. In this case, the author himself points out that his analysis should only be taken so seriously considering he has never seen the 'patient'. I am also dubious about the notion of 'syndromes' in general. Certainly Bill is a liar and a vacillator who denies personal responsibility, but are these traits really caused by the fact that his father was an alcoholic? So I came to the book a skeptic. That being said, I found the book very compelling. The most amazing thing about it is it seems to predict the Lewinsky scandal, and Clinton's reaction to it. Those that loath Bill Clinton will certainly enjoy it, and find it very convincing. Those that love him will dismiss it out of hand. Those who are in between will be very disturbed.

This book, or better yet, the revised version, is a must read for every American. Get a look inside the man we elected twice. Dr. Fick's analysis of Clinton as the "Adult Child of an Alcoholic" sheds light on the apparently erractic behavior of our president.

The most satisfying part of the book for me was learning that Clinton's problems are not the result of some "vast right-wing conspiracy". Rather, they are manifestations of Clinton's unresolved childhood problems.

Read this book and you'll be able to make sense of the chaos Clinton creates. One thing is for sure -- it'll take a while to restore the credibility and dignity of the office of president after Clinton leaves, such is the damage done.

Normally, I dont review books I havent fully read. I make an exception for this one. I picked this garbage up at a book store and flipped through it a little. I came across a passage where the author tried to justify Clinton's draft dodging ways by stating that Clinton wanted to be President and most Presidents with military service backgrounds served in the Navy. This of course begs the question of why Clinton didnt join the Navy. Knowing this , or any other tough question would never be answered, I put the book down.

I did read the bio of Mr. Walker on the jacket cover too. He is far from non-partisan as other reviewers describe. He attended Oxford with Clinton and his background screams Socialist.

I see this book is out of print. A wise decision there!

All things considered, this book has to be considered a disappointment. Its title, "The President We Deserve," is somewhat misleading. It suggests the promise of explanation. Why do we deserve Bill Clinton? How do we deserve him? The book's introduction suggests that what will make this work unique is the ability to place Mr. Clinton within the "context" of his times. This is an intriguing premise. But it never materializes. Instead, what we get is exerpts from Bob Woodward's "The Agenda" and Elizabeth Drew's "On the Edge" but without the quality writing style. I still believe that a book placing Mr. Clinton within a generational context is a highly promising endeavor. Newt Gingrich, Hillary Clinton, George W. Bush, and Bill Bennett are all Baby Boomers. A look at how Vietnam, the civil rights movement, and the sexual revolution shaped their personal lives and political ideologies would be fascinating. But, unfortunately, my fellow readers, we just have to wait.

Even before Monica-gate, there were way too many Clinton books. Some of them magazine articles padded out to book length (Elizabeth Drew). Some with axes to grind and ponderous writing (like Bob Woodward). Some written by right wing nuts who have no idea how to write or conduct research. This book is great---written by someone who has perspective (it probably helps that he isn't an American), wit, and skill with words. It will make you think about Clinton about yourself in new ways.

There are such strange circumstances around the death of Foster that no unprejudiced person who has done serious research can conclude it was suicide. But Moldea does. Draw your own conclusion.

Don't let his detractors on labor's loony left or the hard right fool you. Dan Moldea calls them as he sees them -- and his years of investigative and journalistic experience propel "A Washington Tragedy" at the top of the pile of books about the high-profile suicide of Vincent Foster. Moldea's critical eye, rigorous thinking and fair, balanced analysis of the facts make this book the essential read for anyone seeking the truth surrounding the most tragic sideshow stemming from the Whitewater business scandal.

Dan Moldea does an outstanding job of presenting the entire record of the Vince Foster tragedy in context. Unanswered questions posed by the conspiracists are answered, with significant referencing to the forensic record.

But this book does much more. It reviews the various articles written by Scaife funded activists, like Chris Ruddy and Reed Irvine, and demonstrates how the conspiracists twist the story to suit their agenda. This book is a must read to anyone studying the vast right wing conspiracy.

This book truly discribes the life of our president.

Since this Rookie Biography of Bill Clinton was written in 1995 it has little to say about his actual Presidency, so it does not have as much use today to young students as it did when it first came out. It will provide all the basics for how the boy born Bill Blythe became President Bill Clinton. However, in terms of politics, it is pretty much a toss up as to whether this book is naive or ironic (of course, I always go with irony). It ends with Carol Greene telling her readers: "Being president isn't easy. You can't please ALL the voters. Some are always mad at you. But Bill Clinton still cares about people and their problems. That should help make him a good president." This book is illustrated with both black & white and color photographs, including an enlargement of Clinton meeting President Kennedy in 1963. Most of the color photographs are from the campaign and after Clinton entered the White House. Final Note: The picture on the young girl with the Clintons sure looks more like Tricia Nixon than Chelsea.

First things first -- I've gobbled up several books about the Clinton White House -- the best of which is Ambrose-Pritchard's "The Secret Life of Bill Clinton." I found "Damage Control," the offical autobiography of Larry Nichols, to be a below-average read. Though Nichol's is an interesting personality, this book is poorly written. Most annoying is the fact that the author, David Breshnahan, constantly repeats himself from one chapter to the next. I remember doing this in Jr. High School when I needed to write an essay X number of pages long. Another disappoinment is the Appendix where evidence is presented to support Nichol's story. This should have been the beefiest part, but instead we only get an appetizer. Bottom line: If you have read books by Pritchard, Aldrich, et al., and you crave more, "Damage Control" still might be worth $15 -- one thing it will do is stir your anger, Liberal or Conservative.

gets the message through.
Either way, it shows how the liberal media covered-up Clinton with their stranglehold on the American minds through their media control.
I recommend this book to anyone who wants to see how twisted and deviate the mind has become thanks to the liberal media.
To all my cnl 6 viewers.

Monica Blows! Literally! This book is terrible and there is no way that monika was involved in the development of this book and who does she think she is running for president.I hope to see "moo"nica's picture on the side of a milk carton

I just wanted Monica Lewinsky to know I support her. The reporters treat her like dirt and she does not deserve it. Why does the woman always get blamed for everything? I saw her first book signing at Harrods in London. My heart went out to her. Anyone who saw it could of seen the reporters were getting to her. She looked so upset. I say "Way To Go Monica" about writing her book and letting the world know her side. I would love to meet her so I could give her the hug she deserves. All My Support, Nicole Alexander

CHRIS AND NICOLE AND KIDS

I'm not sure if you'll ever even see this, but I just wanted to drop you a note to let you know that I've always supported you. You went through something that no one ever has had to go through. And, you did so with class.

I've read your book and I think I understand you more. I was wondering, and I know this will sound dumb, if you could autograph my book. It's for no one else's purpose, but mine.

Good luck, Mike G.

I started to read the Forward and knew I was in for it. Olasky compares the book to JFK's Profile of Courage and asserts that it should win a Pulitzer Prize. This in no JFK. Olasky states that the book will not receive the PPrize because it is biased in favor of the House Managers. This is not the real reason - the book is simply bad and a failed effort.

I did appreciate that Snyder stated up front, in his Introduction, that he will be writing about the book from his "Christian" standpoint. Therefore, the reader should know what to expect. Unfortunately, this warning is insufficient. Contrary to one of the other reviews, I felt that the book was highly partisan.

Snyder's underlying premise is that the Republicans sought to save the country from ruin and that the Democrats were partisan with no real basis to oppose impeachment. This is based on deciding that the President's actions were an impeachable offense, i.e., a high crime or misdemeanor. This approach is far too simple and allows Snyder to take cheap-shot after cheap-shot. Unfortunately Snyder fails to report the facts in an objective manner.

Snyder acts unaware of legalese and its role in the judicial system. Stating that it depends on what the meaning of is is is something that occurs in courts throughout the country everyday. Perjury occurs everyday. The fact that so few people are in prison for perjury does not mean that it does not occur. Inestead, it shows how difficult it is to determine intent and how rarely prosecutors will bring actions relating to perjury.

You can say to yourself, that this review was written by a crazy and bitter Democrat, but if you buy this book, you'll be sorry. There must be a library nearby that has a copy if you are curious.

There is no Pulitzer Prize ahead and there should not be. To assert otherwise is simple partisan raving.

K. Alan Snyder, the author of Mission: Impeachable, sets forth in the preface a clearly defined goal in writing this book. He wanted to focus on the House Managers of the Clinton Impeachment Trial - all thirteen House Managers - their legal, moral & political backgrounds, their motivations and their reflections on only the second Presidential Impeachment trial in our nation's history. This disciplined approach is both a strength and a weakness.

This is definitely a pro-impeachment, pro-House Manager book, but it's written in a measured and restrained way so it never sounds particularly partisan. In fact the author goes out of his way to show that these men were not "out to get the President" - a popular refrain amongst Clinton defenders (including those in the media) at the time. Snyder focuses on the legal arguments for why they did what they did, arguments which often were obscured at the time by the sensationalism of the scandalous subject matter but arguments which will ultimately withstand the test of time.

For history's sake, all thirteen managers are given equal treatment. In between a few introductory chapters and a couple of concluding chapters, each House Manager gets a chapter. The author interviewed all thirteen and weaves their comments to the author in with biographical sketches and statements each made at key stages while impeachment wound its way through the House Judiciary Committee, the full House and ultimately, the United States Senate. He also allows for each to briefly reflect on what happened, approximately one year removed from Senate acquittal (his interviews took place in early 2000).

The strength of this approach is that we get to learn about several of the more obscure House Managers who may not be given this kind of forum in other books about impeachment. The weakness of this approach is that, despite cooperation from all thirteen, the author's discipline in keeping to his structured format prevents him from making the book more interesting and ultimately more readable.

In my opinion, Mission: Impeachable would have been a lot more interesting and more fun to read if the author had spent more time writing about the three stars of the Senate Impeachment trial to emerge from amongst the baker's dozen: Lindsey Graham, Asa Hutchinson and James Rogan. It seemed like the chapters on all three were way too brief and in the end I felt like I learned as much if not more about all three from Peter Baker's excellent book on the impeachment, "The Breach", than I did from Mission: Impeachable, despite the author's access to all. It was as if someone wrote a book about the 1978 World Series Yankees team and spent as much time writing about some bench-warming third-string catcher as they did about Reggie Jackson or Bucky Dent. Although it is a fair approach, in terms of history, it just seemed as though there was a lost opportunity here.

In the end, Mr. Snyder accomplished exactly what he intended to do and this book is good because it does provide a forum for the House Managers, in their own words, to describe where they were coming from when they all got caught in the whirlwind that accompanied all those boxes dropped off from the Independent Counsel's office in early September of 1998. My only criticism is that a good (although sometimes dry) book could have been great, if only the author had been a little less disciplined and a little more generous to the reader, given his access to all the Managers.

With those words, lead House Manager Henry Hyde urged the U.S. Senate to convict and remove from office President William Jefferson Clinton, impeached by the U.S House of Representatives for perjury and obstruction of justice in February 1999. In this book, coming over a year after the first impeachment trial in American history of an elected U.S. President, the author reviews the heroic efforts of the 13 House Managers to do their constitutional duty and present their case against the President to the Senate for final judgment.

Each manager was interviewed about their personal and political careers prior to impeachment and how that influenced their approach to it. Then the author followed with what role each manager played in the impeachment inquiry in the House Judiciary Committee as well as before the full House, quoting liberally from their statements in the Congressional Record. Each manager then reflected on their participation in this historic event and its effect on the current and future political scene of our country and the rule of law.

All in all, the book flowed nicely, sprinkled with quotes from Clinton supporters as well. I highly recommend this book to those interested in the Clinton impeachment from the personal perspective of those who were most familiar with the evidence and prosecuted what some have referred to as the trial of the 20th century.

As I picked up this book and started reading I couldn't shake a nagging question: Why would a Pilot, a 'golden boy' with two OPRs signed by the Commander-in-Chief retire as a LtCol (O-5)? He should have been a shoe-in for Colonel (O-6) below-the-zone.

I admit to being less-than a fan of our former Commander-in-Chief. I have my own eyewitness accounts of questional practices and leadership travesties, so LtCol Patterson's accounts added to my belief that as a nation we are fortunate the Presidency is term-limited. Yet the editorial that is Chapter Five had no place in an "Eyewitness Account." Patterson's personal opinions were not conducive to telling this tale, and ironically his opinion about women in combat roles has already been discounted by the performance of women in Operation Iraqi Freedom. So much of the diatribe was sheer foolishness.

I would have preferred a fact-based, chronological account of LtCol Patterson's experience in this White House job. The story, devoid of the editorials, is worth reading (despite being poorly written), but borrow it or check it out of the library.

I saw Buzz Patterson on C-Span and felt I really needed to read his personal account of the Clinton White House debacle. After reading his first hand account I was sickened by the Clinton's as human's let alone representatives of our wonderful nation. I hope everyone of voting age reads this book and makes it a point of never again electing a president that has so little regard for the American people. Both Clinton and his wife are amoral at best and true liars in every sense. We can be assured that she will run for her place in the Oval Office and we must take every measure possible to prevent this from happening. Thanks Buzz!
Kay Clark
Flagstaff, Az.

I suspect that Patterson and Morris feel the same about Clinton for very different resasons. Patterson understands the implications of Clinton's failures on the military and the nation. Beyond ignoring critical calls from his national security advisor while hanging out with golf buddies and running a Whitehouse the more resembled Animal House, the critical failing of Clinton was a failure of leadership. Patterson understands and disscusses the implications of this most tragic shortcomming.

Book is well written with the passion of a career officer and a gentleman.

Highly recommended, even for those who love Clinton

According to a friend of mine who reads scripts for a living, you can tell whether a script will be decent or not by simply reading the first few pages. "I don't know of any film that's been able to salvage a bad first act," she said.

It is in this spirit that I checked out Hillary's book this afternoon. I think it's safe to say that you'd have to idolize Hillary to get through it without falling asleep.

From the first sentence on, it reads like a whitewashed memoir, perhaps of the head of some bland corporation. Hillary has had a pretty interesting life, as these things go, but she is so determined not to burn any bridges that she's sucked all possible life out of the narrative.

This has already been exposed by others as a memoir that was, well, economical with the truth. That might be forgivable if it was an entertaining read. But it feels like it was written by someone who'd ghost-written biographies of particularly dull corporate executives, using the drab style corporations love, and then sent to the Board of Directors for vetting by ten different people.

What's left has been squeezed hard and tight of any form of brilliance or eloquence.

I'm sorry, Hillary; I really wanted to give your book a fair shot. But in the end, I would recommend it only to masochists and insomniacs.

Whether you love or hate; defend or condemn the Clintons, there is one thing for sure: they can still bring passionate debate on issues like whether or not the President has a right to privacy or not for example. Mrs Clinton was put in a tough position during those years or was the position she found herself of her own making? That is just another debate waiting to happen. Go away? No way...President Clinton's book is due out next year I believe.

I read this book as I would any other political novel (fiction or non-fiction). There were parts of this book I felt were quite plausible and other parts, I had my doubts about the honesty. So as long as you read this book knowing that there is an agenda, you probably won't start mumbling to yourself and develop book rage. What I find interesting is that the Clinton critics are buying the books. One note, if you don't want to add to the reported income of the book sales, buy the book used, check it out from the library, or borrow a copy--I did...lol

All right, let's be honest. Everyone who thought that she was going to confess that she was an axe murderer who enjoyed cross-dressing and drowning newborn kittens please raise your hand. Right, no hands.

Normally, people write autobiographies to tell their version of events, and cast themselves in as positive a light as possible. That is what Hillary Rodham Clinton has done in "Living History." If you are a fan of Senator Clinton's, you will enjoy the book, not least because she offers plausible explanations for some of the less savory accusations that have been hurled against her over the last three decades or so, including Whitewater, the national healthcare debacle and those commodities trades. If you are not a fan, you will not enjoy the book for exactly the same reason ' many of the explanations are plausible. Even less appealing to the Senator's detractors, her prose is very readable (though I do wish she wouldn't use "impact" as a verb), her life has been (and continues to be) interesting and she is more charming in print than she often seems in public appearances.

Granted, some of the prose (particularly in the early years) is self-serving: "The keynote speaker at the League convention was Marian Wright Edelman, whose example helped direct me into my lifelong advocacy for children" sound more than a bit self-serving. In her defense, however, she works through the pre-White House days very quickly, so it all becomes a blur of good deeds as a child and honors as a student, right on through graduate school (student government, political activist, first student commencement speaker at Wellesley, etc.). One wonders if she ever got a B in a class or missed a lecture because she overslept. The only exception is her hair, which she treats as a running joke throughout the book.

The other running theme -- no surprise here -- is her belief in a right-wing conspiracy against the Clintons. Read that either as an accurate statement, as the Senator's paranoia or somewhere between. There is no denying, however, that mentioning the Clinton name in certain conservative circles produces the same effect of throwing an ear of corn into a pen of pigs ' both are devoured in seconds.

Whether Senator Clinton does or does not plan to run for President in 2004, or after, one intention of this book is clearly to give her an opportunity to explain herself, and thus reintroduce herself, to the American voting public. That clearly raises the question: why? Perhaps, like Nancy Reagan, she just wanted to tell it her way, or perhaps she is just planning for all eventualities. In any case, this is an interesting read, if not an overly revealing biography of a very complex and ' like it or not ' influential woman in American politics, not a must read, but certainly on the short list for consideration.