International intervention made interesting! I highly recommend this book. It's a page-turner rivaling novels, yet with pragmatic significance and impact. The book covers aspects of intervention ranging from weapons of mass destruction to environmental catastrophe and human rights. When is one nation justified in their interference in another's domestic affairs? Does state sovereignty take precedence, or the global community? This book answers these questions and much more. All aspects are considered, from globalism and globalization to national autonomy. For its thoroughness and superb analysis, I rate this book five stars. Drawbacks? None, unless you're simply not interested in the topic (however, I recommend it even to the skeptic). Kudos to Lyons and Mastanduno for compiling such a masterpiece.

Living in Little Rock, and being familiar with the underlying story, I have to admit that the author's depiction of both is (no pun intended) dead-on. Moreover, it adds depth to a chilling story. You come away from the read with a better understanding of Ms. Orsini--for better or for worse.

This is an excellent "true crime" story that goes beyond the usual perimters of the genre.

Lyons demonstrates a firm grasp of legal priniciples and procedure (which is a rarer talent than it should be) which keeps the various proceedings and machinations clear and understandable. But more importantly, he knows his subjects and places. Little Rock itself becomes a character in this book, as Lyons provides unusual insight into a city and society that few of us are familiar with.

The story is by turns hysterical, astounding and gripping. It is peopled by some of the most decent, and some of the weirdest folks you'll ever have the pleasure of meeting. Full marks.

Beginning in late 1993, I began to read news reports in my local newspaper, the San Jose Mercury News, which contained serious but unsubstantiated allegations about an Arkansas land deal known as Whitewater and the possible criminality of the President and his wife. There seemed to be quite a few of these "news articles" and I began to wonder if all of that smoke did not have a substantial fire at its center. Four years later, I start "pulling" the articles on Whitewater and by now, the numerous "Gates" being investigated and reported on in the daily newspapers, from the archives of the Mercury News and about twenty other Knight-Ridder newspapers across the country. One of the things I learned that a large proportion of these stories were by four reporters -- Jeff Gerth and Stephen Labaton of the New York Times, Michael Isikoff and Susan Schmidt of the Washington Post.

This was an interesting experience, and can be duplicated by anyone reading these words. This is what I discovered: In the San Jose Mercury News alone from October 31 1993 to March 31, 1994, there were a total of 163 stories. Of these, 158 had been published in a 106-day span of time from December 16, 1993 to the end of March, about 1.5 stories a day or two stories every three days. It became even more interesting when I "pulled" the "Whitewater" and "Madison Guaranty" stories from twenty Knight-Ridder newspapers in the 62 days from October 31,1993 to December 31, 1993. There were no less than 83 unique items, about 1.3 items a day, and of course many of the newspapers were publishing identical stories during this time. When you look at the coverage in this way, it looks more like indoctrination rather than reporting.

What were the sources of these unsubstantiated allegations? Joe Conason and Gene Lyons describe these sources in The Hunting of the President as a loose cabal of "longtime Clinton adversaries," "defeated politicians, disappointed office seekers, right-wing pamphleteers, wealthy eccentrics, zany private detectives, religious fanatics," and in my view, the primary culprit -- "die-hard segregationists. . . . " Here, as in the rest of the book, Conason and Lyons restrain themselves from going beyond what they can prove or substantiate from sources -- a demonstration of journalism as it should be practised in this age of "infotainment."

But this cabal had a powerful effect on this country and its politics because as Conason and Lyons tell us in detail, the once-respected New York Times and Washington Post not only published unsubstantiated allegation after unsubstantiated allegation, they also withheld any exculpatory information. Like sheep, the rest of Mainstream Media passively followed.

And here is the real danger the authors expose. The cabal was the source of the allegations which acted as toxins poisoning political discourse in this country. But the Mainstream Media was continuously pumping these toxins into the blood stream of America. Without the criminal carelessness and disregard of the Mainstream Media, the press, the TV, and talk radio, the cabal would have affected only a small hate-filled audience on the right. Instead the poison was spread throughout the country, and into every metropolitan area, city and small town.

Conason & Lyons provide a well documented description of the tactics that were used to discredit President Clinton. Now, I'm of the opinion that Clinton went a long way to opening himself up to these attacks, however the fact remains that the attacks were vicious, well funded, well coordinated, and effective. At the end of the day, these attacks on the president were successful, if we can define ruining the public image of a sitting president as success. In the end America suffered as a result of this, and we owe it to ourselves to understand what really happened. This book is a good starting point, but you will need to read it with an open mind, since it will likely contradict much of what you have seen in the media.

This book proves conclusively that there was indeed a vast, right-wing conspiracy to topple the president. And it started long before Clinton even made it to the White House. Meticulous research on the part of the authors ties all the players together, including members of the judiciary and the press. The notion of the liberal press is thoroughly debunked (not only WSJ but also ego-driven NYT journalists crossed the line in aiding the Clinton-haters) and the hidden role of Richard Mellon Scaife is exposed.

Perjury to a federal grand jury by Linda Tripp and to a congressional hearing by L. Jean Lewis of the RTC were never reported by the press, much less prosecuted. And the American public's dim view of "independent" prosecutor Ken Starr is vindicated: he is a truly bitter, hateful partisan who subverted the judiciary process to advance his own political agenda. His crimes included leaking scores of documents to the press, in violation of judicial gag orders, and lying to Congress about aspects of his years-long $50 million+ vendetta.

A few heroes, such as Susan McDougal, emerge along the way. But the real heroes are the American public who instictively knew that there was something very wrong with a never-ending investigation that began with a decades-old real estate venture but somehow veered into a witchunt involving a consensual relationship between two adults.

Finally, a book that touches upon issues facing all new technological revolutions... How egos, personalities and simply put, cash all come together to develop a scientific journey- and reminds us that people often forget or don't care to look at the outcome of their actions. At what expense should an evolution-altering technology such as gene therapy continue to be developed? This book raises far more questions about ethics than it chooses to answer. It certainly brings into light more controversy than the individual personalities involved ever cared to address while they were doing the research and development of what could be a beautiful yet frightening new technology. A tragic and chilling look at a group of scientists who refuse to look further down the road at the possible ramifications of their actions. It shows how science has become de-sensitized, much like many other capitalistic ventures which are easily guided by the ego and the interplay of an individual's next personal accomplishment, rather than the technology's effect on humanity and its' sacred and fragile future.

Altered Fates is a book that rewards the loyal reader with a memorable explanation of this complex and sometimes daunting field. The science and technology are humanized as they take on the characteristics of the people at work on them and the politics that operates at all levels. Nowhere in the history of human invention have the selfish and selfless motivations of man simultaneouly coexisted, cooperated and collided. It is a must read for the beginner and the experienced practicioner in need of a perspective realignment.

In approaching the topic from an historical point of view this book explains very clearly the issues and technology involved, and and manages to do so in plain english. A very thorough coverage of both the potential of gene therapy and the ethical considerations. It is very readable for someone with no technical background and at the same time manages to explain its subject matter in sufficient detail to satisfy the scientifically inclined reader. Overall a very well researched and written book.

After I read FOOLS FOR SCANDAL nearly two years ago, I told everyone who would listen that all the voluminous Whitewater investigations would amount to zilch, zippo, nada. With the end of all the GOP led investigations, as well as the culmination of the Starr investigation, with its two mentions of Whitewater, Mr. Lyons was indeed correct.

Mr. Lyons, reviled as a "Clinton Apologist" by the media elite, has been proven not only prescient but courageous in his relentless determination to reveal the truth, no matter what kind of forty million dollar hoax the Washington elitists wanted to propagate.

Don't expect the television punditocracy to recognize or admit that Mr. Lyons was right, they don't have the journalistic integrity or character to acknowledge their failures.

A must read for anyone who wants a roadmap to this four year and forty million dollar boondoggle. Now, this is a fleecing of America!!!!!

After reading Jeff Gerth's Chinese spy stories in the NY Times, and realizing that they were mostly anti-Clinton innuendo with very few facts, I decided to read this book.

Lyons dissects Gerth's "journalism" word by word, innuendo by innuendo, half-truth by half-truth, lie by lie, smear by smear. Any reporter at a self-respecting college newspaper who was as dishonest as Gerth was in his Whitewater stories would've been immediately fired.

Before reading "Fools for Scandal," I was annoyed by Jeff Gerth's "journalism"; now I'm angry at both him and The New York Times, since they have obviously become tools of the most poisonous element in our political culture, the right wing.

When the history of this era -- with its right-wing smear machine and the corrupt journalism that is the machine's partner in crime -- is taught, "Fools for Scandal" should be required reading.

The nucleus of Lyons' book began as an October 1994 article in Harper's Magazine. In it he confirmed what I and others had suspected: There was no there there in the Whitewater story, and that it was a hoax with regard to the Clintons.

Two years later, at around the 1996 elections, Lyons and the editors of Harper's came up with this book. More than just a recounting of the Whitewater saga, this book is one of the most damning indictments of journalistic malpractice ever written. At the core of the book is the behavior of journalists at various newspaper and broadcast media outlets in general, with particular emphasis on the New York Times and the now-discredited reporter Jeff Gerth. Needless to say, Lyons' book got a lousy review in the NYT Book Review, yet nobody has ever refuted anything Lyons wrote. Indeed, his book has stood the test of time.

Breezily written, yet meticulously researched, Lyons' book can be read in a sitting or two. I also recommend the section in the back of the book featuring a discussion with Lyons and a number of other journalists with regard to the lack of journalistic standards in the Whitewater reporting.

This book can also be seen as a forerunner to Lyons' (and Joe Conason's) upcoming book on the so-called Clinton Scandals, "The Hunting of the President." If that book is anything like "Fools for Scandal," it should be very good, indeed. Lyons and Conason will still not be invited to the Georgetown cocktail parties, however.

If you doubt that too much education can be a bad thing, read this book. Utter garbage from a Clinton sycophant.

Isn't it amusing to see right-wingers trying to dis people like Gene Lyons?

The only reason I didn't rate this book any higher is because the earlier essays are obviously the product of a man who, though talented, was still learning his craft. His essential artistry had yet to be fully honed in the 1970s.

His essays are especially important today, with the "liberal media" myth propounded by well-financed right-winger propagandists (indeed, a study by the journalism watchdog group FAIR showed that most journalists are wealthier and more conservative than their audience members) and the Murdoch-Moonie Times cabal.

Does everyone have stacks of magazines lying around, meaning to excise treasured articles and send them to friends or to one's own archives? You cannot always plan on purchasing a collection in book form later by subject or author. Not that many essayists or columnists have enough worthy articles to publish in a collection. Certainly Russell Baker, Calvin Trillin, and Mike Royko, are available, but they are humorists.

I was in law school at the University of Texas at Austin about twenty years ago when I first read some of Gene Lyons' work in Texas Monthly and Harper's magazines. Somewhere I have copies or clippings, as I remember sending some to friends, and particularly to my younger brother who was on his way to seeking a career in academia. I was therefore delighted to find out that this collection was available.

Mr. Lyons is seen occasionally on the political talk shows, especially recently in the ongoing saga of Kenneth Starr's investigation of all things Arkansan. He is a reporter/writer for the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette and Salon magazine, one of the new "on-line" magazines. I re-read with pleasure some of the essays I remembered from years ago, particularly "Why Teachers Can't Teach" and "The Higher Illiteracy", along with some I had not encountered before.

The two familiar ones were every bit as entertaining and insightful as I remembered. When parents complain about ignorant and unskilled teachers, even in expensive private schools, and when I hear stories about accomplished and dedicated teachers who are struggling against the odds for tenure in the universities and colleges, I cannot help thinking of Gene Lyons' articles. His witty characterizations about academicians are memorable-I remember laughing out loud at one or two in particular when I originally read the article "The Higher Illiteracy". I laughed out loud again. Too bad "educators" and college administrators are unlikely ever to understand sincerely what Lyons so keenly observed and reported on so many years ago. Or is it possible that they know what the problems are, but will not act?

Briefly, the trouble with teachers in the public schools is that they are trained in abstract "concepts" and mostly worthless "educational theory", usually little more than memorized terminology or "methodology". The insufferable jargon of "educators" that Wilson Follett, (in Modern American Usage, published thirty years ago) called "Educationese" is bad enough. But the real scandal of schools of education at public universities is an open secret to those who have any experience or exposure to them. I first discovered the inanity of it all when I picked up a "manual" issued by the Education Department at a major state university intended for master's candidates writing their theses.

Unfortunately, it is not just precision in language that is the problem. Most education graduates lack solid training and even basic familiarity with the subject matter they are to teach, or are simply ignorant. The rare exceptions are people with advanced degrees who do not succeed in finding permanent college level positions, but are dedicated to teaching such that they go through the education school certification process and, one hopes, end up teaching high school, without having been poisoned while undergoing the process. Some of these people, by the way, were almost certainly passed over for tenure in favor of others for considerations other than the merits of their teaching or their enthusiasm, or even their scholarly achievements.

Coincidentally, but tragically, in the universities, teaching underclassmen is frowned upon by the academic stars of the faculty. These tenured faculty members do research, and teach only a handful of graduate students, while preparing erudite and scholarly (but not necessarily well written) articles for academic journals that no one reads.

Lyons is not a reactionary--he admires some contemporary literature and praises some simple "popular" fiction that is entertaining and worthy. So it is not as if he is just bemoaning that college students do not receive liberal educations these days, or that many of today's writers turn out trash, and poorly written trash. Lyons passionately believes that society should not be providing sinecures for pedants who think teaching freshman English is beneath their rarified fields of "research". He also apparently believes that literature need not be elitist.

I would love to know more about what writers he admires, and why. I also would have liked the author to offer some more observations or a general critique of academic writing style, but just the two essays on academia and teachers are worth the price of this handsome paperback book. Some of the others, such as on modern writers' disdain for realistic and readable fiction, are equally valuable. After reading this fine collection, I am looking forward to a book just announced by this author, on the "hunting" of President Clinton.