All of the Girzone books I have read are wonderful. So refreshing and uplifting. Also, easy to read and understand.
I highly recommend this book.
Anyone who has felt a bit arm's length when reading Scripture will find that they are welcomed into God's story as part of it. Fr. Girzone's writings continue to help bring my God closer to me.....and for that I thank him.....eternally.
Lowell Rinker
I have been a VA employee for 16 years. The above is WRONG. There IS a pilot program in a handful of VA hospitals allowing dependents to use the VA hospital. Otherwise, this is NOT the case.
..."The VA can also pay for long-term care of an elderly or disabled veteran in a private nursing facility if there is no space in a VA facility."
This is also not entirely correct. The operative would is CAN. However, the VA is only obligated to pay for the care of veterans who have a certain percentage of Service-Connected Disability. If they pay at all for any others, most VA's only pay for care for a VERY limited period of time.
Each chapter explains a different benefit program or set of laws designed to protect the rights of older Americans. Security and Medicare take up more than half the book. The discussions of Medicare claims and appeal procedures are particularly thorough, complete with samples of Medicare summary notices explaining what the sometimes confusing columns of numbers mean. There also are chapters on Medigap policies, Veterans benefits, private pensions and 401(k) plans, and federal civil service retirement benefits. However, if you're looking for in-depth information on Medicaid coverage of nursing home costs, this is not your best resource. While Medicaid's basic eligibility rules are briefly discussed, the complexities of transferring assets to qualify for Medicaid benefits are not.
The authors mainly stick to the facts, but every once in a while they reveal their view of our society's tattered safety net. For example, they call our failure to enact a comprehensive, universal health care plan a "national disgrace."
In this novel Hope is engaged to defend Stephen Leeds, a man accused of murdering three Vietnamese immigrants who have just recently been acquited of raping Leeds' wife Jessie. When the men are found murdered and mutilated shortly after Stephen had publicly threatened to kill them, everyone assumes that he is guilty. Evidence found at the scene seems to clinch the matter, but Hope takes on the case and begins to investigate, along with his assistants. As is usual in a MacBain novel, you learn quite a lot about the various characters along the way, making them and their motives believable. I recommend all of the Matthew Hope series. While this one isn't his best, it is still a good pager turner. Recommended.
Four Stars.
Read this one, then enjoy watching the TV movie based on it.
Criminal Conversation and Privileged Conversation are also excellent books.
McBain/Hunter is an absolute gem. I always feel I've gained an experience from his books.
What I enjoyed most about the book was the moral complexity of the characters. Too many books have the clearly evil and the clearly good. In my experience we all have a few blemishes to our souls, a few dings in our characters, and an inconsistency or two in our ethics. This book steps out of a world where characters are as flat and two-dimensional as a soap opera heroine, and into a world where people are as intriguing, mystifying, and unpredictable as they really are in life. Here are people who walk hand-in-hand not just with the companions of their days but with the ghosts and demons of their own pasts and with the shadow side of their own natures.
We are introduced to Bill, a Robin Hood of sorts, an activist for the rich history and community and thriving life of the urban landscape -- at the same time in which he is psychotic killer, an evil genius, inflicting his peculiar notions of justice on people and property as well. In Bill's case, he has an almost terrifying consistency in his ethics. (I can't tell you to how many people I've read the violence-against-women vengeance sequence in the book, and how many of them copped to having similar fantasies.)
Sharon, our heroine, is torn between her own ethics, and those she shares with Bill. She is more effective at solving puzzles than most of the detectives she encounters -- even as she clings to her own mental equilibrium with an at times very tentative hold. Sharon -- along with a third character, Eric -- are engaging as decent people trying to deal compassionately and appropriately with an insane world.
It was delightful to find a mystery in which the ethical questions and the characters were as gripping as the plot.
I will also state it is my opinion that S.Sgt. Matthew McKeon was a good man who made a tragic mistake. The factors leading up to the events of the evening of April 8, 1956 are manifold and can only be fully understood by reading Stevens' book.
My personal perspective comes from having served in the USMCR and the USMC from October 1956 until August 1962 when I was Honorably discharged as a Corporal E-4. I went to Parris Island in early February of 1957 and my recruit training virtually overlaps the events of a year earlier, putting me at the rifle range at about the same time of year.
Like all of us who went though boot training, I too pulled butts at the range. The discipline and control there was far different than back at main side so on several days I took the opportunity to spend my entire lunch break walking all over the Ribbon Creek area. I wanted to understand this incident.
Definitions from Webster...
Marine: Of or relating to the sea.
Amphibious: Able to live on both land and in water.
Swim: To propel oneself in water...To float on a liquid...
DI Motto: Let's be damn sure that no man's ghost will ever say "If your training program had only done its job."
And from Chesty Puller we learn the mission of Marine Corps training! "...success in battle..."
When I got to Parris Island, I was shocked to see recruits who could not swim had joined a service called the Marine Corps. I also thought it strange the USMC would accept anyone who could not swim, but I guess the Navy does too. How much W.W.II footage have you seen with Marines wading ashore under heavy fire when the Peter and Mike boats could not make it to the beach? Or, in jungles up to their chests and necks in water at Guadalcanal and then all over the south Pacific and Vietnam as well.
HELLO! This is the mission!
In training "...the nonswimmers had been taught how to float, tread water, and dog paddle. All recruits in the platoon had received ten hours of swimming instruction before April 8."
Platoon 71 got themselves into trouble by not following McKeon and by "joking, kidding, and slapping others with twigs while yelling "Snake" or "Shark! Suddenly there was a cry for help and panic broke out..."
I had looked closely at Ribbon Creek while at the rifle range and my "vivid" reaction then was someone would need to be retarded or radically incompetent to drown in that area! Several in platoon 71 fit this description.
"About three-fourths of the platoon was squared away. But the remainder were foul balls." "For example, eight of the men in Platoon 71 were either illiterate or had General Classification Test scores - approximately equivalent to an IQ test - below 70."
McKeon's colorful assessment that 25 percent of the platoon were "foul balls", may not have been far off the mark based on the testimony of several members of the platoon at the trial and in later interviews"
"The quality of some of the men under McKeon's tutelage may also be measured by their behavior after completing boot camp. At the time of the court-martial, two men were AWOL from Parris Island, one was AWOL from Camp Lejeune, one had deserted, one was in the brig, and one was awaiting punishment by his commanding officer." Remember these men did not complete their recruit training under McKeon, so other DI's also had a chance to make these guys good Marines.
SDI Staff Sergeant Huff had basically washed his hands of the young men under him...Stevens states "McKeon was failing, and he knew it." I think it was SDI Huff who was failing.
As far as the charges of being drunk the testimony is flawed and inconclusive. "Not until the court-martial nearly four months later would Dr. Atcheson admit that there was no clinical evidence of intoxication."
His own recruits "...testified that there was no evidence that Mckeon was drunk or impaired by drinking". Of all the recruits in the platoon who had made statements "...not one...had anything negative or critical to say about Sergeant McKeon".
McKeon was victim of being a nice guy by helping Scarborough with his bottle, allowing him to leave it in the barracks, driving Scarborough to the NCO club and accepting congratulattory drinks he never finished. Granted, McKeon used bad judgement but he was certainly not a bad guy.
S.Sgt. McKeon was the first person in the water and he was the last one out. He was leading, not just ordering recruits into an unknown situation. It is empirically obvious that if they had just followed him, as instructed, they all would have gotten back safely. Basic for military training!
Bottom line, McKeon was a new junior DI carrying virtually the whole burden of squaring away this platoon. When I got there a year later there was a "Motivation Platoon". I don't know if this approach existed in 1956 but what I saw of the "Motivation Platoon" regimen would have straightened out these "foul balls".
Although busted to Private, McKeon was allowed to stay in the Marine Corps. He attempted to rebuild his career, capitalizing on his W.W.II carrier experience. He worked with an all-weather fighter squadron and supplemented his private's pay by working nights in the kitchen of the EM club. Remember he had a wife and kids!
Earlier that year he had earned his squadrons "Marine of the Month" award.
"With one exception, all of the men interviewed forty years later spoke as highly of their former drill instructor as they had at the trial."
Enough said!
I am sure McKeon did not march the whole platoon into the marsh with the intent that some would surely die and do feel that he has been justly punished for his bad judgement on that fateful night. I could almost feel like I was at the trial by the way Stevens writes. As a former wife of a Marine who spent four years living the "life", I, too, would like to see this depicted on film. I would also like to locate some of the surviving members of Platoon 71 who might have more information of any kind about my father.