This book is essential for the library of every scholar of American constitutionalism. For those who have studied the subject, the superb selection of essays on different aspects of American political thought is enlightening. Those who are simply interested in America's founding may however be at a loss and overwhelmed by the wide range of arguments put forward in the different essays even if Gary L.Gregg did an excellent job in the introduction giving an overview to the reader of what he should expect in each essay. Thus, since all and even the American constituiton and its origins is a matter of perspective, this book can only be enjoyed after a thorough study of American political thought. For constitution freaks however it is not only useful to have, it is a real joy to browse through the essays.

There is a palpable fear that America has lost its way, and perhaps even been untrue to itself. Examples of this loss abound, from school violence to a youth culture nihilism. "Vital Remnants," a collection of essays by some of America's top scholars in history, philosophy, political science, and law, shows, with remarkable clarity, the ways in which contemporary American society has radically altered the course upon which it was originally set. To be sure, our century looks at America with a different set of assumptions than that of our ancestors. "Vital Remnants" gives us clues by which we might stay the course for the benefit of generations to come.

Like all of you who read this review,you're Everest junkies who probably won't even get near this mountain, but are hooked on all books about it.
High; Stories of survival from Everest and K2 is NOT what you're looking for. This book is nothing but one-chapter excerpts from other books. It's like walking into a movie half way through: You have no idea what's going on. Also, there are no maps of either Everest or K2, so if writers of these chapters (and some of them are BORING writers!) describe trouble on Everest's north col or K2's Abruzzi ridge, we can't picture these places in our minds.
This book (unlike all the other Everest books I bought and immediately read) has been sitting on my bedstand for months. I only read it when I wake up at 3AM and can't go back to sleep. Just reading from this book puts me back to sleep reeeeeal fast!
Don't bother with this one. The Everest season is happening right now. Maybe more books will come from this year's hikers.

I very much enjoyed and highly recommend this book. I've read many of the books from which these chapters are selected, yet there was much fresh material for me. The editing was so masterful that even though the chapters are from different writers, mountains, and times, they flowed together seamlessly

High does for climbing what the movie The Thin Red Line did for combat: It explores not the details of the event, but the inner thoughts of the participants. You read what it feels like to have a climber dying in a tent next to you. You learn about the humilation of having frostbite while back at home. You are with the widows who trek in the paths of their husbands to glimpse the mountain graves of their loved ones.

While I can understand that some reviewers felt the selections dropped one into the middle of a big problem high on a mountain without the broader context of the expedition, I didn't feel this was a problem. I don't need the beginning, middle, and end to enjoy a brief tale. There are plenty of books that give all those details, yet few that are gripping to read from the first page to the last.

This is the first book i've read that was a collection of excerpts from other books. The only thing i didn't like was that the book itself was big and bulky. Well anyways, just buy it. you won't be disappointed.

I have heard people say that Election 2000 will be for my generation what Watergate was for the generation before us. That is, the cause of a loss of faith in the government, or in this case, the Supreme Court. Like many Americans I think, I was confused and angered when the Supreme Court stopped the hand recount and handed the election to Bush. And although I didn't understand the legal reasoning, what seemed obvious to me at the time was that the Court's decision was based on politics and politics alone. Dershowitz's book both confirmed this suspicion and helped me to gain an understanding of the Court's decision despite my lack of knowledge of Constitutional and election law. Although he may have repeated himself in his attack on the majority justices, he certainly proved to me that "the decision in the Florida election case may be ranked as the single most corrupt decision in Supreme Court history..." A must read for anyone who felt betrayed by the Supreme Court's decision last winter and is looking for some answers.

Having received this book as a father's day present from my daughter, I felt obligated to read it immediately. As a supporter of George W. Bush's candidacy, I expected a one-sided liberal presentation of the positions constantly repeated by Al Gore and the democrats. Much to my surprise, Professor Dershowitz sets forth a thoughtful, well-reasoned and supported analysis of the events leading up to the December 2000 Supreme Court split decision. Though Professor Dershowitz makes no secret of his personal support for Mr. Gore, it is clear from the outset that the author has gone to great lengths to avoid any personal bias and present the reader with a balanced and facinating step-by-step critique of the personal and political workings of the State and Federal Supreme Courts. As I read this book, I found myself constantly challanged to reevaluate my view of the motivation behind the high courts acceptance of this case for review. Through historical analysis, and insight into the personal motivations of the nine justices, Professor Dershowitz deftly presents a logical case for his conclusion that the Courts involvement and ultimate decision was politically (and not judically) motivated. Any reader, no matter what your political beliefs may be, will find this work to be a masterful tutorial into the workings of our judicial system. Though I still firmly believe that election 2000 ended up at the correct destination, I must say that I am no longer certain that the road we took to get there was the right one. Thanks to my daughter for a delightful, challanging and memorable father's day gift.

Remember the names of Scalia, O'Connor, Kennedy, Rehnquist, and Thomas. Those are the justices who produced the worst Supreme Court decision in over 100 years. How many decades will it take to undo the damage to the Supreme Court's credibility that they caused with the nonsense decision and opinion in Bush versus Gore during the recounts in Florida? I don't know, but Professor Dershowitz should be commended for calling these justices on the carpet for injudicious use of their power.

As a lawyer, I used to feel comfortable with the Supreme Court's ability to handle important issues. Whether I agreed with the conclusion of the case or not, I could predict the line of argument that led the court to its decision. I also knew that the court would try to intervene as little as possible. The only time that comfort level was violated was when the second Supreme Court decision came in Bush versus Gore and included a stay of the recount in Florida. I was flabbergasted. This book helps me to understand how such a result could have occurred. Every attorney, lawmaker, and citizen who cares about having a government of fairly administered laws should read this book, and take appropriate action to see that whatever happened in Bush versus Gore in the Supreme Court does not recur.

Professor Dershowitz makes a bold claim that "the unprecedented decision of the five justices to substitute their political judgment for that of the people threatens to undermine the moral authority of the high court for generations to come." "I believe that they would not have stopped a hand recount if George W. Bush had been seeking it." "In this book, I marshal the evidence in support of this charge."

The book describes in a layperson's terms the legal issues behind the case, and goes on to provide hypotheses about what happened.

Basically, two laws were in conflict in Florida. One called for elections to be certified by a certain date (determining who won and lost). The other called for the ballots to be counted in order to ascertain the intent of the person voting. For over 200 years, it has been established law that courts should decide such conflicts of laws. The Supreme Court of Florida had done so, and concluded that the recounts should continue. Candidate Bush appealed that decision. The Supreme Court of the United States took the case (something that it did not have to do), and remanded the case back to the Supreme Court of Florida for further clarification. That action seemed both proper and appropriate. Then candidate Bush appealed again, and the Supreme Court of the United States heard the case again (which it did not have to do).

The national Supreme Court voted 5-4 to stay (stop) the recount process, pending arguments, arguing that to allow the recounts to continue would cause irreparable harm to candidate Bush. The effect was to bring the electoral victory to candidate Bush. That decision made then and makes now no legal sense. There was no irreparable harm done to anyone by letting the recount continue. There was irreparable harm to those who ballots were discounted and to candidate Gore by stopping the recount. I cannot fathom this decision. It is the sort of thing that happens in tin-horn dictatorships all of the time to legitimize the conclusions of the person in power.

The final decision then rested on an argument that equal protection under the laws required that the certification law hold sway over the accurate counting law. This is the first time that that section of the Constitution had ever reduced the rights of voters. In the past, it had been used to expand the rights of people to have their votes included and counted. The origin of the section was to deal with racial descrimination against blacks after the Civil War so that their ability to vote would be protected. Now, suddenly, the intent of that part of the Constitution was being used to say that some votes didn't count. That's a very strange argument. In the future, that argument could be used to deny the ballot to minorities and people whose opinions are not popular.

The Supreme Court of the United States also said that the Supreme Court of Florida had no right to decide on the conflict of laws issue. There is simply no legal basis for that conclusion.

The problem with these arguments is that they would undermine all sorts of cases from the past. What is the lawnow, as a result? The Supreme Court of the United States said that they would interpret the law this way only in this one case. In other words, they made up the law to fit a compromise that they reached behind closed doors. That's not law, that's dictatorship!

Professor Dershowitz found lots of potential motives. He finds possible reasons for this conclusion for each of the five justices. O'Connor is reputed to want to retire and be replaced by another Republican judge. Having Bush be elected obviously would help. Kennedy apparently wants to be the next chief justice, and has a better chance with Bush. Thomas may want revenge against former Senator Gore's opposition to his nomination. Scalia may want to have more colleagues of his ideological persuasions be appointed. Rehnquist is described as continually meddling on behalf of Republicans in earlier decisions. Whether these motives were in play or not, many will believe that they were. That will hurt the court's credibility.

Obviously, the five justices could decide the case in whatever way they thought the law required. But they owed the rest of us a duty to follow the plain words of the law and legal precedents in the Anglo-Saxon tradition. They did not meet this test. Whether you wanted one candidate or the other to be elected, you were robbed by this decision.

Since these justices are still sitting, Professor Dershowitz argues that the problem can only be solved by appointing better justices who know the law and behave in the ways that Supreme Court justices have done for over 200 years. I agree. Whether you are an Independent, a Republican or a Democrat, I hope you will, too.

We need fairness in the Supreme Court more than anywhere else. What's more, we need the appearance of fairness just as much!

This book, and all of the books derived from the movies, are far worse than the average goerge books. Story is very simple, very brief, and has no creativity. Both of our kids are huge george fans (they even liked this one ok), but this is a pretty weak book.

There's a comforting familiarity about the "Curious George" books: The soft illustrations, the man in the yellow hat, and George's famous misadventures. Here, the man speaks the sentence that starts the mischief: "You stay here, but don't get into trouble." Say that one with a wink in your eye. As usual, George's playful antics get him into a little trouble, but (and also, "as usual") he winds up a hero. Well-illustrated, humorous, and soothing, it's the literary equivalent of hot chocolate on a cold day. Excellent for readers in around grades 1-3, as well as a great bedtime book for your young sports (or Curious George) fan.

After reading a few reviews of this book, I felt I had to write one. My 22 month old son has adored this book since he was about 15 months old. It is his absolute favorite. No, the illustrations aren't artwork. No, it's not going to win awards. But who cares! It's for the child - not the parent. My son (just like one of the other reviewer's child) shouts "foul ball!" and "you're out!" He looks for Jimmy's mother in the crowd and he points to his own feet when we get to the part where George picks up the ball with his feet. I think what matters is that it's a fun, easily understood story for toddlers - with bright, neat illustrations. Our paperback is so dog-eared, I logged on to order the hardback...and ended up writing a review. Give this book a try - the wonderful moments it will give you and your child are at the very least worth the few dollars the paperback costs.

The play, My Fair Lady, was a delightful comedy

It's loverly, loverly, loverly! I couldn't stop reading it. I've seen the movie aout a gazillion times, and I have three recordings of "My Fair Lady" (The Original Broadway Cast and London Cast, both with Julie Andrews, and the movie Soundtrack), and the book is just what I needed. I could often quote the movie, and as my friend Mishi said, I'm "a perfect Eliza!", but the book's just wonderful. It's going to help me do this on stage one day . . .

Between Earth and Sky sees the characters of Guardians of the North face the destructive path of General Custer and the Seventh Calvary as he ventures close to the Canadian frontier in the Dakota Territory. Will Custer's presence bring a destructive Indian war between the Sioux and the Cheyenne, or will the North West Mounted Police be able to keep the peace in this hostile territory? Reena receives a telegram from her injured uncle who has been serving as a scout to General Custer, requesting her help in nursing him back to health. Taking her very life into her own hands in order to reach her Uncle, Reena embarks on the voyage across the hostile lands with Hunter Stone, Del Dekko, and missionary Jack Sheffield as her excort. As a battle seems to be looming on the frontier, Jack seeks out Chief Crazy Horse in an attempt to talk reason and smother the building fury of the Indians. Will they remain safe in General Custer's army, or will they venture through hostile Indian territory in order to make their way back home? Will God protect these honorable people, or will they see destruction before the novel ends? A suspenseful novel based on the tensions between the Indian nations and with the pioneers encroaching on the home of the Indian people.

All six of my children have loved Curious George books and I have to read them to them until they have memorized them. In this book George get in to mischief as usual but all ends up well in the end, of course.

An intesting book about the story of the narrow minded puritans fighting back against the british army ,once a great powerful one. A great book espescilly when the army are made out to be fools. A well written book of life in 1777.

First book was good. well.....Now they (or Mayne himself) is/are not moving foward. repetitious schemes with minimal ideas. Graphics drowned in mindless Form-z models and renderings. Mighty Thom Mayne has lost his creativity.

One of the few architecture books at the brick and mortor bookstore that isn't sealed shut with shrink wrap. After I flipped through it I immediately bought it through amazon. It is designed by Cranbrook design superstar Lorraine Wild, the design perfectly represents what Morphosis is about. I take it from the other reviewers that they only looked at the images and did not read anything at all because they did not "get it". Their work is delivered as a cyberpunk novel outtake, the setting an industrial dance club with torture devices. There is a wonderful surreal short story that acts as a sort of guide to viewing the work as well. I am not an architect but this is inspirational enough for me to spend half a decade in school to become one. Reminds me of the Jean Tinguely book published in the early 70's (with sketch overlays) and a similar design philosophy as Low/Tek

Being an architecture student, I constantly refer to many books, and Morphosis is one of my favourite contemporary architecture firm. This is really a thick and quite a heavy book. Its a compilation of many of Morphosis' work. Their "Best Of.." volume. This marvelous edition is divided into 2 parts. The first part consist of many colourful computer generated views, elevations, plans and 3D computer models etc of their buildings. The 3D models give a good visual understanding of their complicated but exciting buildings. The second part consist of essays by Thom Mayne. The thing about Morphosis is Mayne's writing is clear. He states his intention and theories clearly without getting out of the subject of architecture much. He talks about the difference between a project and a building which is a very good way of looking at architecture today. The graphics and writing provide a very clear understanding of their buildings. The bottom line is, if you like Morphosis, you'll love this book among your collection.

The authors seem to be out-of-touch with today's high-tech banking and trends. A new generation of bankers moving at the "speed of thought" has left the contents of this book in the dust. Not a good pick for educating students who will lead the pack in the new millennium.

It is a very useful book with a clear style and it presents an in-depth analysis of commercial banks. But it lacks one thing that could have made it much better: it doesnt have a solutions manual and a guide for the cases..It presents difficulties for the self learners like me...

The essentials of banking are clearly explained in this book.Topics such as the management of bank capital, asset/liability management,international banking and bank mergers and acquisitions are explained with detail and clarity. Though this book doesn't deal with internet banking it helps you understand the underlying nature of every bank. I specially like the chapter where the authors explain the profitability of banks and how the banking business measures it.