This book is a complete waste of money, time and innocent trees.
The author (and I use that term loosely) is caught in pure emotion, hysteria and progandizing rather than looking at the facts and analyzing based on those.
The author completely lacks the ability to think logically, critically and sensibly. Margaret Sanger was many things--a "killer" was not one of them. Margaret promoted birth control so as to avoid unwanted pregnancies. Therefore, the term "killer" is inappropriate. (Men who complain about a women getting pregnant should have vasectomies.) Birth control is
about women having some say over their bodies--anyone who is against Margaret Sanger and her views is against a woman having a free mind and exercising her right to do as she see fits with her
body. Margaret Sanger was an intelligent, bright and compassionate woman who saved many lives.

If you want to learn FACTS about Margaret Sanger, this is not the book for you. There are many fine FACTUAL books out there about her that would be worth the time. This book is not one of them.
Don't waste your time or money.

It's truly a disappointment that amazon would carry a book as pathetic as this one.

From the first words it is obvious that the author has his own agenda--just as he says Margaret did! And since his agenda is to deny the basic human right to control one's life, naturally he thinks she was a "bad person." He is very confused & illogical in that he thinks birth control is a religious issue, not the freedom issue it is. I do not care if he wishes not to use birth control--that is his right. However, I do not want him telling me I can not. He further confuses the issue by painting Planned Parenthood as only an abortion provider. Whereas, 95% of their work is preventing abortions! Yes Mr Grant, using birth control "religiously" is the surest way to prevent abortions, like it or not!

Margaret Sanger's own words should sink the ship of Planned Parenthood. I'm glad that Grant wrote such a book. His writings are needed to balance out the Planned Parenthood [material] being rammed down the throat of society. Although I do agree with the...reviewer's notes who gave the book 4 stars out of 5, I thought that my review of 5 out of 5 is more fitting...

Her columns were interesting the first time, but they don't wear well with age.

I thought this might be interesting or have some insight but it is really just a tired rehash of her time magazine columns along with a few chapters of original material. Making things worse is her 'Jayson Blairing' of the facts. She misquotes people so horribly that it totally distorts the meaning and it is done in such an obviously bias way that there is no question about her motives. If you really want to know about the president you are better off with Molly Ivins than this.

Take a bunch of old TIME magazine columns, string them together with anecdotes (meant to be heart-tugging) about Carlson's brain-damaged brother and working-class Irish-Catholic parents, and slather them with goo intended to soften her sharp elbows deployed during her singleminded ascent to the tippy-top of Georgetown s**thouse aristocracy.

Whadda we got? The unfortunately buyer gets a book that in truth merits no stars at all.

Carlson's brownnosing of the Washington Post's Katherine Graham is sickening enough without a half-dozen mentions of how Carlson's daughter was married at "Kay's" Georgetown mansion. Did you catch that? If you didn't, Carlson will remind you.

Oh, and George W. Bush made silly faces and served fancy food on his campaign's press plane. Maybe that's how both he and Margaret, as the book's subtitle reads, "made it to the White House." By being dim and opportunistic? Must be.

June 30, 1999 What is creativity, is an audio lecture which needs either better focus or a better title. In short it needs to be redevloped to be somewhat more creatively entertaining. When I purchased this audio book I thought I was going to be getting an imaginative fun philosiphical look at the human condition for being able to be creative. What I received was a series of four essays which sounded like they were read by a robot. Too analytical and definitely NOT VERY CREATIVE or interesting. (Special note I've only made it through the first one.) By looking at the copy right date its easy to tell that this is one of Audio Scholars first audio novels so I can't be too critical. They're later ones are much much better especially, T-Rex and the Crater of Doom, which takes a palentology scientific discovery and turns into a really fun adventure of science and discovery. I would really like to see this particular product redeveloped into a fun imaginative philosiphical look at the human condition for being able to be creative, similar to the T-Rex mention above. Leave the analytical discussions of paintings out as they are too specific and I found them oh so boring. It's alright to create an audio lecture on the history of art, but that's the history of art and not creativity and the human condition per say. I would tell listeners to avoid this audio novel and wait for it to be redeveloped properly. Arnold D Veness

What is creativity? I owe an apology to Audio Scholar for my first review. I should have finished listening to the whole whole audio novel before saying anything the whole work. My first review only pertains to essay 1 on tape 1. After abandoning the first tape because of unpredicted content I continued with tape 2 and was pleasently surprised with an engaging discussion on the philisophical nature of creativity and the human condition. One of my favorite readers, Jeff Riggenbach, read the last of the four essays. I would still like the audio book redeveloped to have more emphasis like the content contained in essay's 3 and 4. Arnold D Veness

As with all Curious George stories, I disagree with the generalmoral that this book carries. And that seems to be that all's wellthat ends well, or the end justifies the means. I disagree with this philosophy, and especially think it a bad philosophy to teach young children, who, due to their inexperience and lack of reference, need stricter boundaries than do adults or even adolescents. I give This book 2 stars, instead of just one, due to sentimental reasons, I suppose. Curious George was one of the first set of books I remember that had a little more vivid color than the standard red and black library books of my early youth. END

I love all of Cresswell's books with only this as an exception. I must say that it is so un-Cresswell. Maybe because it is co-written. I saw the movie He Said ,She said and it was so funny and entertaining that I thought this book would be the same.

I read this book when it came out in 1990 and always remembered it fondly. Unfortunately, when I reread it recently I learned it wasn't as good as I believed. Laura Penn is dragged into a murder investigation when the prime suspect, her ex-husband, names her as his alibi, then asks her to play along. Laura is horrified, but doesn't believe him guilty so agrees. But when more murders occur, with her ex looking more and more suspicious, Laura begins to fear she made a mistake. Then there are the strange items that begin appearing in her locked home, items linked to each of the murder scenes. Detective Max Elliott knows Laura is lying about something. Can he get her to confide in him before she becomes the next victim?

"Jigsaw" is an acceptable romance. Max and Laura's relationship is developed well, though it won't set the world on fire. This is also one of the most frustrating suspense novels I can remember reading. There aren't that many twists. The only thing that keeps the plot going on so long is the leads' inability to see the obvious. St. George lays out all the necessary clues early on, making it easy for the reader to see where she's going, but the characters consistently refuse to see what's right in front of their faces. I felt like I was having a flashback to when my kids were trying to learn math. 1 + 1 = 3? No. 1 + 1 = 4? No. 1 + 1 = 5? NO! (OK, for the record, my kids were better at math than that!) More than once I threw down the book when the characters dismissed important information or failed to see that 1 plus 1 does equal two. The book also features the kind of climax where the heroine is made vulnerable through sheer stupidity. By the end of this exercise in frustration, I really didn't care if they lived or died. Just as long as they finally got a clue. (On a side note, Laura Gordon tells a similar tale in Intrigue # 282, "Dominoes," which is slightly better. Slightly.)

St. George's other Intrigues, "Murder By the Book" (# 198), "Cache Poor" (# 230) and "The Renegade" (#358) are all far superior to "Jigsaw," which is neither as deep or well written as her later work. I would suggest passing on this one and looking for any of those instead.

This book was a disappointment from the beginning. For a couple of years I had wanted to read this book because of a review I had seen in the back of another book. It sounded interesting, well thought out and funny. It was not. The characterization was poor, the heroine ridiculous and brainless, and the hero loathsome. How could I even begin to care for either of them when I couldn't even stand them? The answer is that I couldn't, and for the first time in my life I didn't finish a book. I read the last 3 pages, something I normally wouldn't even conceive of just to find out what happened. (They lived happily ever after, is anyone surprised?) I've read several others of Margaret St. George's books and have always found them to be entertaining and interesting. This one should not have even been written.