Cowboy Religion is part autobiography and part philosophy primer. It is the chronicle of a very personal journey, yet in sharing his experiences Edwards opens up a variety of personal paths for the reader to embark upon. The book provides an interesting examination of the dual messages of media/religion that the modern human being is constantly bombarded with. Cynical, angry, heartfelt, and funny, Cowboy Religion is a users guide for the modern mind living in the modern world.

Cowboy Religion provides the thinking generation with a healthy antidote to the plague of energetic fundamentalism.

This is an eye-opening study of the relations between colonial Americans and British regular troops and Royal Navy seamen in the century preceding the flashpoint of the American Revolution. Relying heavily on diary entries, court records, newspaper accounts, and other primary source material, Leach describes a tumultuous relationship between provincials and redcoats that started badly and continued to grow worse throughout the eighteenth century. Even in war time, the relationship often broke down. Colonists viewed a standing army as a potentially repressive threat to liberty, even when such troops were sent ostensibly to protect them. Redcoats usually made unfavorable first impressions among the populace, demanding privileges the colonists were unwilling to grant, while the impressment of provincial residents caused great consternation up and down the American seaboard. Colonial resistance was met with hostile words, outright threats, and arrogant behavior by many British regulars. Forced to pay inflated prices for supplies or to confiscate what they needed, the British saw the colonists as greedy, lazy, and unpatriotic. For their part, colonists saw the British soldiers as arrogant, demanding, and unconcerned with colonial interests and prosperity altogether. When the two sides did join forces in battle, such as at the siege of Louisburg, the entire campaign revolved around recriminatory charges on both sides. The redcoats in particular looked down on their American allies as sloppy, unprofessional, and noncooperative, while the colonists seethed over the fact that British rank superceded their own. All of this was complicated by the fact that controversies between royal governors and general assemblies, as well as intercolonial rivalries, also led to problems which the British troops failed to understand. The king and Parliament in Britain did little to help matters, and their failure to specify jurisdiction and chains of command in the American setting led to further confusion and controversy.

By 1763, it is easy to see a deeply ingrained resentment between redcoats and colonists. While this certainly contributed to the eventual declaration of independence and the British response, this would still seem to be a secondary influence compared to matters of natural rights, taxation fairness, and larger political/economic factors. The disdain expressed by professional British soldiers and sailors for their disorganized, unpolished, amateur American counterparts may well have led them to underestimate the fighting prowess of the Americans; militiamen, for their part, had to be encouraged by the fact that their wilderness fighting skills gave them a distinct advantage over the redcoats' European formation style of fighting. More importantly, a shared and pervasive resentment of British regulars was an important unifying factor among all of the colonies by the eve of the revolution. Given the history of joint cooperation and continual conflict between the British and Americans, it is a wonder that British colonial control lasted as long as it did and that English control of the colonies was never lost to the French. While Leach may overestimate the importance of this matter of military relations in explaining the origins of the Revolutionary War, the relatively unknown history revealed in these pages is both fascinating and disturbing.

*Roots of Conflict* examines the relationship between British armed forces and colonial Americans from 1677 through 1763. This cut off date, 1763, is deliberate. The events after 1763 that culminated in revolution are not the whole story. The author contends that the roots of Anglo-American conflict stretched back a full century and set the stage for the eventual decision to declare independence. He finds these roots in various negative experiences that shaped Britains' and Americans' perceptions of one another. The very presence of troops in the colonies, for example, caused resentment among Americans, who perceived the British army as a symbol of imperial power and a tool to crush colonial insurgency. The British, on their part, resented their role as defenders of backwoods settlements of ungrateful, militarily inept, undisciplined yahoos. Various joint military expeditions, furthermore, ended disastrously, Americans chafed under harsh military treatment, and the impressment of Americans into military service, volunteers being scarce, was common. These experiences and others fostered mutual ill-will between British and Americans and hardened perceptions of each group's being different from the other. A good book for readers interested in the American colonial experience or the causes of the American Revolution.

...If you are well grounded in the faith, Steadfast and immovable (Col1:22-23) read this book to sharpen your discernment. In studying these men we get a better understanding of what we are up against presently. When you discover the full scope of Calvin's destructive doctrines, his five points, and how everything ultimately concludes with 'unconditional' eternal security, you will see the handprints of Satan in every tenant. These men planted the seeds of modern day easy believeism, although unaware of their negative influence, the things they taught will ring throughout eternity in the ears of millions of lost souls who bought into their security in sin message.

The sermons of Edwards are a cornerstone of religious faith in this country. His ability to reach common man led to a national revival. This "calvinistic" doctrine is what our nation needs now! It is both a comfort and a fearful thing to know that our eternal lives are in the hands of a loving God and a just God who can be angry at sin!!! I'm sorry some people feel threatened by Calvin and Edwards but if you are seeking enlightenment this book can help point you there.

Let us not put too fine a point on it...Douglas Southall Freeman simply LOVES Robert E. Lee. If you have also read Freeman's equally exhaustive biography of Washington, you can debate which man Freeman loves more. At times the prose, though beautifully written, can get positively gushy. There is no way the reader can consider this an objective biography.

However, until some other historian writes it, Freeman has produced the most comprehensive biography available. His research is thorough, and the writing is definitely beautiful and enjoyable to read.

It is not unbiased. Lee is practically shown as infallible, the Yankees are portrayed as malignant, vile creatures that cheerfully trample the Constitution underfoot, and Lee's mistakes are written off to the bumbling incompetence of his subordinates. While the biography abounds with detail (which makes it an indispensable part of any good bibliography), there is definitely an agenda at work here. This is work which needs to read in concert with more recent scholarship.

This abridged version eliminates some of the mind-numbing detail of Lee's life (I do think that Freeman got a little carried away with this...if he had pared it down a little it might not have taken 20 years to write), but you will still get plenty of the worshipful, gushy prose. What would Freeman be without the gush?

LEE, by Douglas Southall Freeman, and James M. McPherson, who wrote the forward.

The one thing that stood out was that Robert E. Lee was an honorable gentleman throughout his life. He lived in the time when that was the thing to do. He not only was a fine military Officer, but a good man. Robert E. Lee was a man with a code of conduct that he imposed on himself and never wavered from it. He fought for the Confederation as the General of the Army when he knew that the south was loosing the war and did not really believe in what the south stood for, but he believed in honor and defending his home, Virginia as he always had.

This book was the result of combining seven volumes and making one book. Editing it must have been a job and it was a job well done. The book is seamless in spite of the fact that is a combination of seven volumes. The war was very well covered. It will make a lot of battle fans happy with its detailed description of every battle.

Lee's destiny was set when his father, 'Light-Horse Harry" Lee who was a brilliant dreamer about riches which, he never seen, had quite a bit of influence on Robert's life. Harry spent some time in debtor's prison. His father's life had a great deal to do with Robert's attitude toward any kind of debt. He believed in living on the money you had.

Robert managed to get into the Academy with the help of his friend's and mother's family. He graduated at the top of his class in West Point. He studied engineering; it was the only thing that emphasized physics and math at that time (1820). What Mr. Lee had during this time, was brains that was driven by his code of life, which allowed him to be a historical figure in the 19th Centenary. I'm afraid that this code of living, honest, truth, ethics, and honor has been downgraded by a lot of people to where it does not have impact in the 21 Centenary. It used to be what American stood for.

Robert E. Lee graduated from the West Point Academy with honors in 1828-29. Lt. Lee received his first orders as a Brevet Second Lieut. for duty with Major Samuel Babcock of the Corps. Of Engineers for duty at Cockspur, Island, in the Savanna River, Georgia.

His brother, Henry Lee disgraced him by losing the family place Stratford for a debt and getting in trouble with the younger sister of his wife. What would not have been worth bringing up now days, the honor of the family meant a lot more then--Henry Lee was never mentioned again by Robert E. Lee.

Finally, in 1846 Lt. Robert E. Lee received his order to report to Brigadier General John E. Wool for service in Mexico. He was chosen to fight in a war, his first. He left the Mexican war when it was over as a brevet of Colonel without the colonel's pay. During the Mexican war he had earned the high opinion of his supervisors and the other American Officers for his superior ability to think and carry out an action. He was now 'Colonel Lee', a title of respect.

A great part of the book explained in detail about the battles when he was the General of the Confederation of Army. This part of the his life is very covered in detail. Later he accepted a position at Washington and Lee University and left that position and the world in 1870.
Roger Lee

I have other biographies of Lee but none like this one. As it is a rather large book, I felt it would take me a little time to finish but I finished it in just a few days simply because I couldn't put it down. Freeman captures the "real Lee". You see him in his victories as well as in his defeats. You see him as proud but humble, a great warrior but a very gentle man,. You will be with him at his battles, watch him deal with his subordinates and his superiors. You see a man that didn't want war but became one of its' central figures. Above all, you will see that he was a great man of character and dedication. A must read for anyone interested in the Civil War or in the life of a truly great man: a man of great character and dignity.

How to Master the Art of Selling is a book that must be read by anyone planning on entering the sales profession, and everyone currently in sales. No matter how good a salesperson you believe yourself to be, your sales skills can be sharpened by the information contained within the pages of this book. Tom Hopkins has been a master salesperson for many years. He has taken the time to compile all of his proven sales techniques and list them in an easy to follow format. Since I read this book, my sales have increased dramatically. Even though I have read this book from cover to cover many times, something new is gained every time I read it. You don't have to be in sales to benefit from the knowledge that is in this book. What you are selling does not necessarily have to be a product. It could be a point of view or an idea. How would you like to be able to talk someone into or out of something? You will be able to, if you follow the guidelines that are in this book. You will have a better understanding as to what people think about when they make decisions. Mr. Hopkins calls the people who have mastered the techniques in this book "champions". He says, "you know the champions when they walk through the door." If you want to be a champion,

Copious strategies for becoming a salesmanship champion fill the pages of Tom Hopkins' book. This is a handbook for those who are eager to become sales masters, but are asking themselves, "What do I do next?" "How do I deal with a procrastinating client?" or "How can I effectively present my product?" Hopkins conveys instructions and suggestions through a variety of sales conversations. The author, a master salesman, is obviously enthusiastic about helping others succeed in sales. His strategies, which are based on seminars he teaches, include steps for organizing and writing a successful sales presentation. He also provides strategies for closing sales. The information could be more compact and less repetitive, but it is logical and sometimes even funny. We from getAbstract recommend this book to people involved in all levels and aspects of sales.

I saw Tom Hopkins at a "Success '95" seminar in Louisville.
His performance was electric. After the seminar I purchased his book, "How to Master the Art of Selling." I have read it cover to cover, and I have studied the material. I can tell you that it works. Whether you're in sales or just want to improve your interpersonal skills, Tom's book is great. His pointers on how to address rejection, prospecting,etc. are right on the mark. I recommend it highly.

This was and excellent book, focusing on President Carter's life after his 1980 loss to Ronald Regan. The president allowed the author, who had complete access to President Carter's records, to interview him several times. Thus the author was able to gain tremendous insight into Carter's personality.

From his involvement in Habitat for Humanity to his efforts in the Middle East Peace Process, the author beautify weaves the character of Jimmy Carter with historical events. The book reads with the ease of fiction.

An enjoyable, contemporary history about a unique individual, it was a pleasure to read.

This book provides insight into the life of Jimmy Carter after his defeat to Reagan in 1980. Every chapter divulges new aspects of Carter's amazing post-presidential life. Brinkley has managed to present an accurate picture of Carter that does not gloss over or mock his faith. Well done!

To the below reviewer who wrote that "Carter has not done an intelligent thing since leaving office", I would say that you are entitled to your opinion but you obviously did not read this book. To make such an assertion needs factual backing. You can say that Carter failed as a civilian ambassador but you cannot deny that he and his Carter Center helped forge peace, eradicate numerous illnesses, free thousands of political prisoners, and inspire millions. That is a viscious, partisan attack and has no place in a review of this book. Interesting to note that outside of the US, world leaders and people would heartily disagree with any assessment of Carter that fails to acknowedge his monumental contributions to peace and human rights. I defy you, after reading this book, to list a single modern president who has done more than Jimmy Carter.

If you are even slighly interested the post-presidential career of Jimmy Carter, this book is a great work of art! I knew that President Carter was a hard working, great man; I just did not realize How Hard Working, Caring, and Diligent President Carter actually is. He is defintely a man that is a great role model for all people that are interested in running for a political office, or wish to live peacefully on planet earth. Mr Brinkley does a fabulous side of pulling us in to the Carters' world, educating us, and entertaining us. This is a GREAT book!

While this Psycholgy book does have some good points and interesting approaches, if you use this book in a class setting you will be dissapointed. The questions that the proffesor will use for test and quizes are elementary. But so elementary that they are completly subjective.

I used this book in my intro psych class last fall and that it was rather interesting, as far as intro books go. I especially liked how each chapter highlighted a specific experiment done recently on the topic the chapter is discussing. It also had many good graphics and charts, many of which the professor took to use in her power point presentations. The only fault I had with the book is that it seemed a bit too much on a high school level even though it was billed as a college text. But other than that, I thought this was a well-written, and well-executed textbook, though I would be more inclined to use it in a high school psychology course and not a college level one.

I don't know if this is going to reflect on the quality of the psychology book, or the caliber of books I have read and reviewed, but I must say, this introductory psychology book is one of the best I've ever seen. The examples capture the reader and are used in an intelligent way to demonstrate the major points of each chapter. And I was never bored once with this book, which is a big plus. A great book for an intro to psych class!

The hero, a mathematician and soldier, is cast far forward in time and takes the place of a miltary officer in a decadent army.

The strength of this book is that it is easy to read and shows a large amount of originality. I leave it to you to decide what its weaknesses are.

Not a "must read", but an entertaining couple of hours.

This is the best and most unbiased history of King Philip's war. Leach wrote the book; Morrison only wrote the two-page introduction. Leach tends to be a little "politically correct" but in generally he gives us an unbiased history. This is an interesting book and I've just finished rereading after a 10-year gap. It is still interesting.

This was an amazing war between Puritans, who were would poorly equipped in nearly every way, against Indians who would were born and raised in warfare. For many months the Whites lost virtually all the battles. King Philips' war was one of desperate sieges of tiny garrisons and ambushes of those Whites trying to rescue those besieged.

Just when you think the Whites are about to get the upper hand, the Indians attack new targets and the Whites are losing again. The most amazing thing is that the colonists had not one English soldier or ship to help them. They raised and equipped their own little militia companies. Unlike some other Indian wars that only had a few battles, this little war had dozens if not hundreds of little battles.

The Indian was as well armed with flintlocks, as was the White. In this war, the Indian was far superior in tactics and he was never beaten when he could fight his guerrilla style warfare. This was the Indians' last chance to push the White man into the sea. Providence (Rhode Island) was nearly destroyed and the Indian raided the towns adjacent to Boston. Town after town was destroyed.

I think this book is a little superior to Schultz's "King Philip's War," which is a little bit too PC. But both are well worth reading.

Of all the accounts of KPW, this is by far the best. Though not as detailed as others, I found this gave an excellent birds-eye view of the war.

I part with the other reviewers in the analysis of Leach's objectivity. Most of the KPW authors of the last forty years appear to hate the Puritans as much as the KPW authors of the 1920s and earlier hated the First Nations.

Leach's work, I think, holds a good balance. He clearly acknowledges English arrogance, stupidity, all-out barbarism, and total failure in the area of evangelism, without making ridiculous leaps about English psychology.

It's an outstanding work.

If there is solid criticism of Leach and Morison, let it be founded on fact, not based on bias. In these days of political correctness, anything that shows settlers as good and Native Americans as less than perfect is derided as inaccurate. In fact, there were wonderful cases of heroism and despicable acts of barbaric cruelty on both sides of this fight, and this book presents them better than any book I've ever seen. I'm puzzled by those who feel it's pro-English; some of the most disgusting portrayals are of English leaders. I believe King Philip's War set the tone for European-Indian relationships for centuries. This book does a superb job of documenting the cultural chasms that brought about this tragedy. The truth can be uncomfortable for supporters of either side, but we should seek the truth, even when it upsets us, and apply the lessons of history to our day.