With a title this bad, you know the story has to be good. THE SPIDER is out-of-town fighting bad guys again, with the usual twists and turns to the plot, and two bonus short stories from the 1930's to boot.

This book offers a step-by-step approach to writing grants, written by Robert Zimmerman, one of the principals in a San Francisco-based development consulting firm. The book is geared for all non-profits, with good general information but with no special tips for those in education that seek grants. The second chapter, Who are the Grantors?, defines foundations, corporations, religious donors, and government agencies. The section on Religious Donors highlights a donor group that is frequently overlooked. Zimmerman outlines the methods used to obtain information on the grantor - an important step, since a key to funding is to know what the funder is interested in supporting. He offers information on the key resources: the Foundation Grants Index, the Foundation Directory, the Foundation 1000, annual reports, tax returns, and the foundation libraries, but also features the Foundation Grants Index quarterly and other periodicals, and some tips on obtaining information about corporate giving programs (Taft is really the best resource for this, beyond the corporations themselves). He identifies the elements of a research profile outline, and outlines methods of online research, a relatively new tool for grant writers. Most beginning grant writers make simple mistakes that can be avoided, if only they read the directions and plan their project carefully. Beginners also tend to focus too much on the writing (even worry too much on the writing) and of the entire 48 pages of this book, only 13 are given to the writing of successful proposals. On the one hand, people in search of specific help in writing may consider this a weakness of Zimmerman's guide; on the other hand, his de-emphasis of the writing process focuses attention on the process leading up to the grant should be a good clue to the beginner: the process is key to success in the grants world. The attention paid to detail ahead of time is as important -- possibly more -- as the final product. Finally, if an aspiring grant writer is working in education, for example, running acorporate and foundation relations office or a government grants office at a college or university, this book is very elementary - it will only take the novice a short distance of the total he or she needs to go to learn the profession. However, it is ideal for the small non-profit, looking at writing one or two grants over a period of a couple years.

I heard about this book while talking to one of the persons quoted in it. Dick Peterson, an AME who worked on a lot of the planes in the book and knew most of the pilots. Also, I have the good fortune to know one of the pilots as a friend with whom I fly every year to my Canadian summer home. Because of this personal interest, I may be just a little prejudiced but I found the book fascinating reading. The history of the float planes from the earliest Curtiss HS-2Ls to the present Cessnas, Beavers, Otters and Twin Beeches is presented along with stories of the escapades and strange happenings of the pilots that flew them. For the technically curious, that information is included in the back of the book. Anyone with any curiousity, bent toward "seat-of-the-pants" flying, would love this book.

Delhi has laid claim to be the capital of India since the earliest days of Aryan civilisation in the great North Indian plain. Rajput kings and Muslim invaders alike have built large planned cities and strong fortifications. Delhi has attracted many because of its strategic location: defended to the west and south by quartzite ridges that are the last spurs of the Aravalli ranges and to the east by the great Yamuna river, which has also ensured it plentiful water. To the east lies the fertile Gangetic plain and to the west the rich lands of Punjab with its five rivers. From Delhi pressure can also be exerted to the south on Ajmer, the gateway to the Rajput kingdoms. No fewer than 15 cities had been built on this spot beforethe British rulers of India decided to move capital here. By doing so they wanted to lay claim not only to the vanished Mughal empire, which had its brilliant court in the Red Fort in the heart of the city of Shahjehanabad on a site northward of Delhi, but also impress upon the people that they were the legitimate heirs to the great empires which had ruled from this spot. Imperial Delhi, then, was to, from thebeginning, be a city that would awe the beholder. It was to be the expression of British might in India, of its stable policies and enlightened views, and of its respect for law, order, reason and tolerence. It was also to be a city that would in its architecture display a synthesis of Classical and Indian design elements, thereby symbolising the progress and harmony that was to be had out of co-operation with the rulers. This book is one of the finest chronicles of the process of planning New Delhi and its principal monuments. It covers the original vision for the city, several alternate sites and plans, and the eventual outcome of the co-operation between Lutyens and Baker. New Delhi's systematic lay-out is the highest evolution of rational principles. The Vicregal Palace together with the Secretariat blocks occupies the highest point- Raisina hill. In defence of !this site Lutyens quoted from the Bible ' the city on the hill cannot be hid'. A great east-west axis- the Kingsway- proceeds from Raisina to the Yamuna and the oldest city of all Indraprastha. Wide green lawns, straight avenues of trees and long reflecting pools border this principal axis. The Kingsway is cut at right angles by the other axis of the city- the Queensway. At the heart of the city stood a statue of the King-Emperor, while arrayed around the hexagon around it that delineated Prince's Park, were the palaces of the Maharaja's friendly to the British. The whole thus expressed a rational, well-planned city, where the Viceregal Palace symbolised the paramountcy of the British empire over the native rulers, who affirmed their loyalty to the King. With its wide, straight, tree lined boulevards the city has often been compared to Haussman's Paris. The resemblance is strengthened by the enormous All-India War Memorial Arch that stands in Prince's Park, astride the Kingsway. Its proportions and outline recall the Arc de Triomphe and the whole is remniscent of the Champs Elysee. Meanwhile Lutyens evolved a style that could truly lay claim to the brilliance of Indian decorative elements while espousing for its overall form the simplicity and strength of Classical Greek architecture. His sandstone buildings are simple and massive, shunning excessive decoration for a nobler expression. Restrained and fused to these solid buildings are decorative elements from the three principle Indian cultures, Hindu, Muslim, and Buddhist. Lutyens deliberately avoided an ' Indian style' because he felt that there was none such- each ruler had merely imposed his conventions and indeed Indian buildings are modest in their structure and ground-plans. Most cover this up with a profusion of decorative elements, but again Lutyens shunned this over-richness for a more austere and formal style. This was also necessitated by the raging controversy over whether Delhi should have a Muslim or Hindu architecture, which threatened to ! incite communal riots. Insofar as Lutyens borrows form Indian structures it is from Buddhist stupas such as the one at Sanchi, for their bold simple lines struck a chord. For the rest, the wealth of floral and geometric patterns, not to speak of animal carvings that India has produced are subtly woven into the whole. This book covers the entire history of the evolution of New Delhi. I recommend it for the wealth of plans and lay-outs it has, as well as some of Lutyen's original designs for the Viceroy's palace. It should appeal to all those with an interest in city planning or in the architecture that Lutyen's promoted which sadly did not outlive him. It is unique in that it neither gets bogged down in academic discussions of what city-planning ought to be, of the needs of developing nations or of indigenous design requirements, nor is it a glossy picture book of Delhi's 'sights'. It is a well-paced, thorough book that evokes the image that the planner's of Delhi had in their minds- of a grand city, that a nation that considered itself to be the heir to the Roman Empire would be proud to build. Perhaps the only shortcomings of this book are that it does not display all the plans that are discussed nor does it indicate which ones the text is referring to. This means that one has to often read very carefully and try to make a plan fit a description. This difficulty could very easily have been obviated. Secondly, while much of Delhi eventually remained on paper, it would have been worthwile to display and discuss those structures that never got built. The rapid decline of the British Empire meant that Delhi remained an unfinished city, and I was particularly looking for insights into the Delhi that might have been, the institutions, hospitals, libraries, museums, offices that were doubtless intended to fill in the capital and continue and irrevocably establish Lutyen's claim to an imperial architecture for India. While Delhi remained unfinished, this book need not have and from a historical chronicle could! have continued into the imaginary realm of the Delhi that was envisioned, the Delhi that was to be the second city of the Empire after London, the Delhi that might have been.

Can the federal government effectively target funds to needier communities? Does political support exist at the federal level to achieve redistribution in the allocation of intergovernmental aid? The purpose of book is to answer these questions through a case study of the Urban Development Action Grant Program (UDAG). The authors contend that "...effective targeting and redistribution of resources undermine political support for the policies and programs that accomplish them (p. 2)." Their thesis is that "...large redistributive programs such as UDAG automatically generate political opposition powerful enough to transform them into distributive programs or lead to their demise. This study of UDAG is a good example of what happens to federal programs that seem to work. The authors' argue that the very success of UDAG in targeting economic development funds to stimulate private investment in distressed cities may be the reason for its demise in the late 1980s. UDAG was a difficult program to create in 1977 because its redistributive purposes meant that achieving the necessary political support in Congress would be tricky. It ran counter to the pork-barrel politics and logrolling style of Congress in which bills try to have something for everyone or a quid pro quo on a future bill. The Carter administration was able to push the bill through Congress but its later demise would be due to weak political support. Distributive bills have a far better chance of passing the Congress than one that would reauthorize a program that redistributive federal monies to selected, needier communities. This case study of UDAG effectively addresses issues posed above. In Chapter 3 the authors present a careful and thorough account of the political history of UDAG, showing the linkages and differences between this urban program and others that preceded it. They carefully demonstrate that after authorization, the program had to undergo further definition by HUD in order to be implemented; in addition, amendments to the program were eneacted by Congress in 1979 to better target funds to "pockets of poverty." But, the evolution of UDAG throughout the late 1970s and early 1980s was one of political and programmatic changes to refocus, make less-targeted, make less redistributive, and make more universalistic the direction of the program. The end result was to produce a program in the Reagan years that had little political support, declining appropriations, and weak linkages to its original purpose. This assessment of the authors is supported by a series of GAO reports on UDAG and an internal HUD evaluation of UDAG in 1982. The book does a good job of summarizing the crux of the issues raised by these reports. The general conclusion is that politics makes it very difficult to effectively target programs to distressed communities. Members of Congress, particularly those whose districts do not benefit from a redistributive program, seek to expand the boundaries of programs like UDAG in order to receive a greater slice of the federal budget pie. But the broadening of programs without massive new funding produces insufficient funds directed to urban problems. The end result is that federal dollars are spent with only modest impact on the intended objective, which is relieving economic distress in the neediest communities. Who benefitted from UDAG? In Chapter 5 the authors present the heart of their empirical analysis of the program, comparing so-called Rustbelt and non-Rustbelt cities that received UDAG funding. Their analysis is descriptive and understandable, presenting an effective test of their thesis. The conclusion of the analysis is that UDAG was essentially a redistributive program throughout its lifetime. Because of its targeting, it did not provide equal shares of funding to all regions and states, thereby undermining political support for the program. Only the small cities portion of the program followed a distributive pattern, offering somewhat more non-targeted aid to non-Rustbelt communities. The demise of UDAG is consistent with the books premise that giving three-fourths of the money to large cities in a basically redistributive pattern killed political support for reauthorization. Of course the bashing that the program took from the Reagan administration and its abuse by HUD also contributed to its demise. The authors raise an issue in their presentation suggesting that the UDAG experience reflects a "structural limit" in our political system (p. 10). They seem to believe that redistributive programs may be doomed to failure in this country because of the policy-making process. I don't buy this premise. Many redistributive programs have been successful and have survived politically. More likely, UDAG is just another in a long line of programs that were created to serve targeted needs but were broadened over time by the Congress. This country has a history of universalism in the reauthorization of programs--be they urban or rural, rustbelt or sunbelt, Democratic or Republican initiatives. The interesting finding of this study is that UDAG survived for as long as it did as a more-or-less redistributive program targeted to needier cities in needier regions of the country. In some ways it may be better for urban areas to fight for targeted programs--even if they will only survive about a decade. Ten years of targeting to distressed cities may be far better than 20 or 30 years of universalistic distribution of federal urban funds.

This book does not reveal anything about Edgar Cayce that wasn't previously known so Cayce fans won't find anything new in it and those who arn't into Cayce won't find it of interest. The book is published by ARE Press, the outfit that publishes all the Cayce material, so what else would it be about. There are better Cayce books and much better 'life after death' books around.

I highly recommend this book to anyone who has lost someone they love or simply has a curiosity about what happens when we die. It answers so many questions that we all have regarding the afterlife. It gives hope to those of us who are grieving, that we will see our loved ones again. It's the best book I've read yet on the subject and it's my #1 recommendation. Well organized and written so that most readers can comprehend it. A great work!

So many books out there on life after death cover one aspect of this vast subject. In "The Place We Call Home," the author has answered a wide variety of universal questions concerning this subject and drawn from very credible sources. I'd read Dr. George Ritchie's book on his near-death experience, in the Place We Call Home, the author obviously interviewed him and brought out amazing details not included in Ritchie's books. Ritchie glimpsed the realms of heaven and hell - and Grant found correlations from diverse sources that shed so much light and all agreed! Grant detailed that God loves us unconditionally; but it is human beings who create their own hellish after-death state by hating their fellow man;harboring prejudices;being vengeful. Ritchie, Edgar Cayce, British writer Helen Greaves, all said where we go after this life depends upon how much we chose to love, to forgive, being kind,etc., all the virtues of the spirit. In short,all that we build in this life goes with us after death. Those who hate will find themselves in a place after death that reflects that. Edgar Cayce experienced the hellish realms in visions,and Dr. Ritchie saw the same things. However,unlike the fundamentalists beliefs, there is no eternal damnation. Grant managed to show a multifaceted picture that every soul has the opportunity to move out of the "shadowlands"; this is based not on one person's view, but on many. He also writes how we can work with dreams to help heal the grief from a loved one's passing. Dreams are a doorway,according to Grant,where our loved ones can communicate with us. In short,they still hear us and love us;and if we've got unfinished business,guilt,remorse like,"I wished I'd told her Iloved her before she died," the book shows,beautifully,that love can't die and it's never too late to say the things in our heart. They shed the body, at death, but that's it--they still love us and they feel our hurts, pain,and our joy. We've been taught it's too late after they're dead. Grant has a step-by-step exercise that brought me GREAT HEALING...I know now,like Grant said,"the bonds of love are spiritual,not physical...and they continue to exist after death..." What a relief, a joy and a treasure this book is. He discusses what happens during the dying process at the soul level - and that relieved and helped me so much. And reading it made me want to be aboutthe business of being kind,loving,compassionate NOW. Hell is seeing after you die that you chose not to forgive or be kind. And according to Grant, we will all have to review every thought, deed, and act of our lives. And we will experience the impact we had through the eyes of every person we helped,andthose that we hurt. That saying, "he's gone to his reward," is truer than anything. We go after death, to what we've built,and we inherit it. I thank God for this book. I have a new chance everyday to make a difference. And the good we just try to do here,according to Grant,goes out and uplifts the entirety of the universe! And yes,"that which you sow, (here on earth),"so shall ye reap"(afterdeath). This book made me stop and ask,"What am I building?" EVERYONE should read this book....There is a Light at the end of the Tunnel! (please edit this, I know Iwentoff on a tangent...if you don't print it,Iunderstand....maybe someonethere on your staff will pick up this book. If one person does, then my mission is fulfilled!

Unless you're purchasing this book for a child, avoid it. The text is written at the level of a fourth grader and the conclusions drawn are about as weighty. There are numerous errors pockmarking the book, some of them not inconsequential (Grant did not graduate from West Point in 1845, but 1843).

If you want a readable and scholarly book on either Grant or Lee, don't buy a dual biography. Each man is much too vast and important to cover in such a manner. Opt for Emory Thomas' Lee biography and Campaigning with Grant by Horace Porter. These books will illuminate the titans of the civil war much better than this sorry effort.

Not everyone is excited by history or the Civil War or even biographies of historical personalities. My daughters (age 14) were required in home school to read biographies of famous Americans. They were easily inspired by biographies of women -- entertainers, leaders, women who overcame adversity. But men were less interesting. And men known specifically for their historical contributions were downright boring. One of my twins started reading this book and loved it. The side-by-side biographical sketches provided enough information to interest her and offered a format for making snapshot comparisons. She is definitely NOT a history buff and is NOT a lover of biographies; however, for a short piece of her life she took time off from the Hardy Boys and read about (and discussed) two great men, the Civil War, and pieces of American history. (She went on to read about Civil War photography.)

I thought that "A House Divided: The Lives of Ulysses S. Grant and Robert E. Lee" was a wonderful book. I especillay liked it because I'm a Civil War fenatic. It was not only intresting but accurate. It was a fun to read book. It tells about how Grant, a contry boy who grew up on a farm in Ohio who when he was about 17 went to West Point and graduated yet the sight of blood made him loose his apitate yet he went to war and won against Lee. Lee was a proper slave owner and grew up on his father's plantaion, he had manners and was a very good student at West Point. Yet he was one if not the 1st. person to graduate from his class at West Piont and still lost to gruffy Grant. Read this book if you want to learn more about Lee and Grant. It also has pictures of them.

This book has good points and bad points. On the good side, it is very tongue in cheek and humorous, if one likes that sort of thing, though some puns were used over and over. I can't count how many times the alliance of countries was likened to a marriage.

On the downside, it was not an ideal textbook. My class is using it for our AP US History class, and it really does not suit the purposes of a high school course. The authors obviously spent so much time attempting to be humorous that they forgot to put facts into the book. The section on the Webster-Hayne debate said absolutely nothing about what the actual subject matter of the debate, only described the orators themselves in great detail and made jokes. It also contains a lot of useless information a high school student would never need to know, such as a physical description of each president and the exact parallel of every territory's boundary.

It probably suits the purposes of someone trying to learn and study American history on their own because it is amusing enough to keep the reader interested. It is not suited to a high school class trying to learn and memorize straight facts.

This book handles its subject very well. It was the basic text for my 11th Grade history course, where it provided a good balance of mildly amusing wit and genuinely useful information.

The main advantage of "The American Pageant" is that the author is not trying to push a major political agenda. It lacks the patriotic drivel for which "traditional" history texts are often denounced. However, it also lacks the negative, depressing Socialist philosophy which makes Zinn's "People's History of the United States" so difficult to read.

The end result is a history text which does a history text's job: telling what happened. The book covers politics, economics, and major events in a style which is sometimes amusing and usually informative. Although not overly political, it also pays due attention to such important issues as race and gender.

Not a particularly "specialized" book, but an excellent survey text.

I can quite clearly remember the amazement with which I first read the opening paragraphs of Bailey's American Pageant six years ago in high school; and even now, after graduating from college in a field completely unrelated to history, I return to this text to read in my spare time just for the sheer enjoyment of it. I hesitate to even call it a text: rather, it is almost a work of art. Personally, I am flabbergasted by some of the negative reviews I've read below. Of course someone will not like this book when they haven't read it all semester, and then they have an approaching final and try to quickly skim the text and learn all the "important facts" of this nation's history. This book isn't written to satisfy the poor study habits of a mediocre, disinterested student who could care less about history; it is written to express history as seen and studied and understood through the eyes of an absolute genius: Thomas Bailey. For those who believe the book is opinionated, I'll agree with that notion. That's what historians are supposed to do -- they shape and mold historical events into tangible, real entities that one can relate to, rather than just relate dry facts and statistics. (That's what an encyclopedia or government records are for.) If I could, I would give this book more than 5 stars -- surely it deserves as much.

This book has good stories and bad stories. No, there is no bad written story. There are some stories very difficult to believe, like "Death to the Easter Bunny!" By Alan Ryan. At least, I can read another Stephen King, "Nona". But it is not enough to get a 10. Paulo Sunao

Well this book is a mixed bag. Some of the stories I really liked and were really well written, yet others I just didn't like at all. I loved the chilling story of "Canavan's Back Yard," and I thought "The Rubber Room" was an interesting tale of a paranoid man thinking Jewish people had a conspiracy against him. Also, "Out Of Sorts" is a clever werewolf story. And as other have mentioned, "Down Among The Dead Man" is an excellent WWII vampire story (while that may sound bizarre, it is written so well you won't even notice just how odd this seems). However, like I said, I did not like some of the other stories. Like "Death To The Easter Bunny," for example. I just found this story repulsive (if you've read the book, you'll know what part I'm talking about.) And "The Crazy Chinaman" also seemed very out of place in this book. But in this book, the good outweighs the bad. I would recommend this book to fans of horror in general or fans of any of the authors.

This is a reprint of the Dodd, Mead Gallery of Horror from the early 1980's. There are a number of stories which stand out but "Down Among the Dead Men" by Gardner Dozois and Jack Dann in particular. This is a story you will not soon purge from your subconscious. There is also the classic "Canavan's Back Yard" by Joseph Payne Brennan which is one of the master's best. Seek out other collections from Jospeh Payne Brennan, he is one of the unknown masters. This is a collection which deserved to be reprinted although they marketed it as if it was a new collection. Highest marks!

I was very surprised when I ordered this book and found out that yes, indeed, it was merely a very tiny portion of what I had expected. I suppose I should have known from the price, but the description (at least at that time) did not make it clear that it wasn't the entire dictionary.

While this may be a very thorough source for the words it covers, it should be noted in the basic information that this is ONLY 128 pages of a 15,000 page work. The description above is very misleading.

itz a dictionary. what more can i say