This is the third book in the series and yet again "extreme mental instability" because of past experiences ends up being the reason a person is killing people - just the same as the last two in the series. Is everyone in the small village insane?

The writing is solid and I enjoy the historical perspective and would read more in the series - but come up with new reasons for the murderers to kill - good old fashioned greed would be fine for a change.

Hannah Trevor is a wonderful character. Margaret Lawrence really does a wonderful job with the tone and detail of this post-American Revolution series of mysteries.

Another day in Rufford, Maine, another murder for Hannah Trevor, soon to be Mrs. Daniel Josselyn, to solve. But of course, nothing is that simple. Her beloved cousin Jonathan has run off into the wilderness, still involved with the regulators movement. She worries about the fate of her deaf daughter. It doesn't help, of course, that Daniel is somewhat suspected of the murder...

As usual, the prose of this novel is wonderful, a real pleasure to read. I'm not sure, however, that I liked this book as much as the other two. I didn't like the retrospective portrayal of the late Charlotte Josselyn. I did really like Sibylla, though. And Jem Siwall, for some reason. Sherriff Tapp is an excellent bad guy, though he gets a little weird toward the end of this one.

The last scene, though...It is so wonderful. I loved it, a perfect fiery climax to this little trilogy. It redeemed anything that bothered me about the whole rest of the book. Excellent. Margaret Lawrence has a real talent, in my book. I have my eye out for a paperback of Icebreaker, her new novel, so I hope that'll be good.

The Hannah Trevor mysteries are wonderful. Read them, it's a real experience!

The story of Hanna Trevor and all her loves is such a compelling story. Margaret Lawrence has such a wonderful talent for bring her characters to life. There are very few books that use the fictional setting of post-American Revolutionary life that this is a very refreshing and enlightening read. Ms. Lawrence does a great job with developing characters and plot lines. Weaving everyday life with the extra story of mystery and murder. The author makes the reader feel for each and every character. Ms. Lawrence gives the reader a good solid understanding the society of this time, so that the reader learns and empathizes with each character.

In "The Burning Bride", Ms. Lawrence weaves a very good murder mystery in with the on going story of Hanna and Daniel and their love for each other. Both plot lines are very satisfying in their delivery and conclusion. The author gives the reader many suspects and reasons that keep me guessing till the end of the book. I highly recommend Margaret Lawrence's Hanna Trevor trilogy. Even if you think you might not enjoy a story set in the 1700's. This is mystery writing at its finest. But, start with "Hearts And Bones" and "Blood Red Roses", if you read these books out of order, you won't get the full enjoyment of this series.

This is a wonderful collection of poetry, no doubt. Offering various styles and poets, the poems in "Sound & Sense" are absolutely beautiful. I don't have much to say about the constant remarks by Perrine. Why? He makes this into an English textbook. But! - poetry is not like math. There is no step-by-step way to read or write poetry, and there is no RIGHT way to do so either. This book tries to lay it out too much. Yes, I see that is is an "introduction" to poetry, but a reader will fall into the idea that poetry can only be approached through the mathematical ways laid out in "Sound & Sense." After all, Robin Williams in "Dead Poets Society" (film) did ask all his students to rip out the introduction of an earlier version of "Sound & Sense." Why? Poetry should be read, and if you wish to analyze, there's no way to set about doing it.

But - the collection of poems is reason enough to buy the book.

This textbook methodically explores poetic form and structure. This approach could have been quite limiting, but Perrine manages to analyze poetry without undermining his central message - poetry is to be enjoyed.

I highly recommend this book to both readers new to poetry and those that already have considerable familiarity with the major poets.

A ninth edition is available, but with a title change. Sound and Sense is now Perrine's Sound and Sense. Look for more reviews under this new title (ISBN 0155030280).

NOTE: the edition of sound and sense that i have read is the seventh, an old copy that my father used in high school. this book is quite simply the best anthology of poetry i have ever read. as if that weren't enough, as a textbook it includes simple, elegant, and intelligent commentary to teach the basics of style, metre, etc. a great book - quite possibly the only book of poetry you'll ever need.

I was sad to see some reviewers here give this volume one or two stars based on some imaginary defects with the work -- ie, that this is a revisionist history of the Constitution, that Tribe is anti-natural law, or that Tribe didn't say enough about the Second Amendment (duh! he reserves discussion of that Amendment and all the other rights-creating amendments/provisions for Volume Two!). It's pretty clear that the reviewers who gave this work negative reviews didn't even crack the spine. Give me a break!

The fact is that this volume is extremely well-written and meticulously researched. Plus it's written by THE preeminent con law scholar, somebody Supreme Court justices read on a regular basis (and hear regularly at various oral arguments). If you don't agree with Tribe's conclusions on a particular issue, well, he's given you plenty of other scholarship and caselaw to go look at. I turn to this volume quite a bit in my practice to get an overview of constitutional issues. My only regret is that Volume Two is not yet available. Come on Larry!

Tribe has a long-existing and well-deserved reputation as one of the country's great Constitutional scholars. This book is thorough, well-thought-out, and provocative. It's not a book for a beginning Constitutional Law student, but it's one that a reader can come back to over the years, over and over,with the goal of better understanding the unity and structure of the Constitutional system. The text is both comprehensive and, at the same time, confrontational: it challenges the reader, it argues, it takes strong positions, and it educates. Argue with it, let it argue with you. You'll come out of the argument with a better sense of Constitutional logic, the dynamic nature of the system of Constitutional government, and of your own views. It's a classic.

If you have not yet had a chance to grace the doors of Harvard Law School, this is your opportunity to experience the wit and wisdom of Professor Laurence Tribe on the subject of constitutional law. The book is an invaluable addition to any federal court litigator's arsenal, and many aspects of it can usefully be referred to by law students as well. The book is especially interesting and informative with respect to the intricate and often quite creative connections it draws between constitutional provisions and doctrines that on their face do not seem particularly interrelated. The historical overviews of the development of key constitutional doctrines are especially riveting, and will likely interest individuals in a broad variety of fields.

Although I have been studying French since High School, the Capretz method features something that no high school or college course can supply - interesting French conversations.

I find the program not only to be challenging, but very entertaining. Because there is actually a story going on, I don't mind watching the videos or listening to the tapes. Unlike other popular methods on the market, Capretz uses dialog which is usefull to the student.

In addition to being fun, the tapes also stress repetion and drill after drill. The tapes also depict French as it is actually spken today. For example, all the speakers say jsui instead of je suis.

I find this the best mathod on the market. The only problem is that if you can't get the video segment off the television then the program is going to cost you some big bucks!!

I've tried a number of different language course in a number of different languages over the years, but this is far and away the best. It's an immersion course, which means the videos and the audio-tapes are completely in French. It helps at the start if you've done a little French before, but even if you haven't, the extra effort in the early sections pays off handsomely. The videos are an essential part of the whole package, though they seem to be fairly widely available on public TV. (Here in Australia, ABC TV shows them nationwide, continuously, as part of the Open Learning programme). I strongly recommend buying them if you can, otherwise you are going to have to tape all 52 programmes off-air - you need to watch them over and over for maximum benefit. Each episode consists of 10 minutes of the story (a charming and quirky American boy meets French girl in Paris soap opera)and twenty minutes of explanation by Professor Capretz, an equally charming and quirky instructor. The whole is interlaced with hundreds of brief extracts from French film and TV. You watch the video several times, then work through the audio tapes to improve your own speaking, pronunciation and comprehension, read the text, then do the exercises. It might sound repetitive (all language learning is), but the story does hold your interest right to the end. I did it as a two year course with Open Learning in Australia, through the University of New England, and was sorry when it ended. This is a good way to do it, but it will work fine for a self-learning course. It's fairly costly, with textbook, workbooks, study guide and audiotapes, not to mention the videos, but you won't find a better course for learning to speak French or understand it from radio, film or TV. The reading side has been strengthened in the second edition, but to get to be a fluent reader you will need extra reading outside the course.

One of my teachers ( a French national) criticised the course for cultural bias (a little upperclass and American) and he has a point, but for a rapid and enjoyable path to fluency, this course can't be beaten.

This is an amaizing course in how to communicate in French. Communication is not only the words in the sentance but how they are constructed and the subjects that evoke a response. The course is fun, albeit corny but amusing, story of an American boy in Paris who falls for a French girl. Through their adventures one is introduced not only to the language but to the subjects dear to the French heart. I have heard some of the conversations almost verbatum between French people during my 6 years in France. I still listen to the tapes from time to time to memorise sentences that work at engaging french people. Any of the conversations on food are a winner along with things like 'la belle pierre de France'. Its amaizing what cords these subjects and the way they are presented in the course ring a chord with the French. The people who put this course together understood the differences between the American perspective and the French perspective and were able to emphasize or play with these differences to point them out in the course. I wouldn't consider buying any other method until I had this one.

Fifteen-year-old Joan, a Chinese-American girl from Ohio, travels to a rural village in West Virginia in 1927. This daring move makes her family the first Chinese people this town has ever seen. She and her parents immediately discover how odd they are as viwed by prejudiced bums and snobby schoolmates. The Lee family has staked everything on this gamble to unknown territory--without any extended famly to help--where they plan to open a laundry business, as they did in Ohio. Will the townsfolk flock to this new establishment, or continue washing their own dirty shirts?

The first week is a terrible strain on both the parents but especially for Joan, suffering the pangs of teenage acceptance at school and justified rebellion at home. Deeply hurt by rejection from the town in general and a snobby clique at school, Joan feels she just can't fit in, and will never be accepted, although she is praised by her teachers. Then too, she makes a tactical error by befriending a red-headed outcast whose family are Performers! Despite repeated vandalism and hate slogans on their fence, the Lee family refuses to give up and leave. Can a gracious, retired school teacher, with no family of her own, be accepted and adopted by suspicious Chinese parents--who refuse to accept charity from their kind landlady? How far will adults and even their children go to keep from becoming objects of town ridicule or bringing shame upon their family's strict code of honor? We mark Joan's budding maturity, as she recognizes that she is not the only Star Fisher (reference to a Chinese Folktale which is presented in detail) in town. An excellent introduction to culture clash in America.

"I thought I knew what green was until we went to West Virginia." That's how Star Fisher, by Laurence Yep, starts off. The book is about a Chinese - American family who moves from Ohio to West Virginia in the 1920' s. They start a laundry bussiness, and try to fit in. Joan Lee (the main character) finds new friends and finds a new relationship with her mother.
I thought the book was good. My favorite character is Joan' s sister Emily, because she was funny, smart, and brave. She always says what she feels. Some parts were sad. Like when she gets into a fight with her mother. Although I thought it was sad, their fights drag on and on. Other than that I enjoyed reading The Star Fisher.

This book is about a fifteen year old girl called Joan. She is from Ohio and came to West Virginia to make a new life. When she first came right off the train there were no greetings instead they got bad comments. A lot of people did not treat the Lee's like Americans, although Joan, Bobby, and Emily were born in America. People made fun of the Lee's because they are chinese. Sometimes in the story Joan would compare herself with the star fisher, which is a chinese folk tale. After a pie social, the Lee's start to feel more accepted by more than just a few town members. One thing because they are the first chinese- americans Clarsburg has ever seen doesn't mean that they have any differences, they are still humans they have feelings too.

Antonin Scalia is blessed with a powerful intellect and a persuasive manner of expression. It's about time that a member of the US Supreme Court explained in terms intelligible to the average "newspaper reader" just what is going on in federal appeals courts. If not all of Justice Scalia's recommendations are correct, he certainly, at long last, has been able to ask the right questions. Proponents of judicial activism (and Scalia graciously shares space with two of the most famous, Tribe & Dworkin) will be hard-pressed to keep up the pretense that federal courts today are much more than arenas for elite social engineers to rework society in their own image and likeness. A fine study in modern legal philosophy, I recommend this work with few reservations. My complete review of Justice Scalia's book can be found in "National Catholic Register" 26 Oct. - 1 Nov. 1997, p. 6. I have seen the review posted on the Web as well.

In this tidy book, Justice Scalia puts forward his theory of jurisprudence and takes on the subject of judicial philosophy and what he calls the modern movement of judicial activism. He begins by giving an overview of the history of common law and judicial review, in which he contends that judges historically respected stare decisis - that is, previous rulings. Only in modern times, with the rise of democratic activism, has the desire of judges to "make law" become a problem of significant proportions.

Scalia then gets to the heart of his argument - that the role of the judge is not to ascertain the intent of legislators, but rather to ascertain the meaning of the words contained in a particular document. In this sense, he a textual purist compared to activists who will search out the meaning of particular pieces of legislation by evaluating legislative history, popular press, Congressional record, etc. He concedes that language must be interpreted, but he argues that there is a disciplined approach, and a liberal approach. The disciplined approach he supports would evaluate text within the notion of reasonable interpretation, "placed alongside the remainder of the corpus juris."

"Government by unexpressed intent is simply tyranny," Scalia argues. "That seems to me the essence of the famous American ideal set forth in the Massachusetts Constitution. A government of laws, not of men. Men may intend what they will; but it is only the laws that they enact which bind us."

Scalia argues that the fact that some texts bear multiple interpretations does not sink the enterprise of textualism. The divide on constitutional questions is not between what the framers intended and what they wrote, but rather between original meaning and current meaning. Scalia argues it is precisely the threat of abolishing cherished rights that makes original meaning important - it is a protection against those, (say Nazis) who would seek to impose a new order or new interpretation of acceptable governance. He argues that the notion of a "living constitution" has narrowed the straits of American freedom, not expanded them. The prevailing mood may or may not be just in the eyes of history, but leave that to the legislators and the great debates among thinkers and politicians; don't seek to encode today's moods in tomorrow's constitution through judicial activism. The avenues for changing the constitution and expanding its purview are well known -- otherwise, leave legislating to the legislatures.

Tribe and Dworkin offer the most interesting rebuttals. Dworkin seeks to root constitutional interpretation in broad principles of understanding and rights; Tribe concedes he has no theory of jurisprudence, other than he finds it difficult to accept the certitude of either Dworkin or Scalia that they have the right interpretation. His is a strange argument. Scalia never says the Constitution does not bear multiple interpretations, but he does argue for a more disciplined approach, in which rights are not found willy nilly in the minds of judges and then imposed on the original document by which we are governed. One annoying aspect the book: Tribe responds both to Scalia's original essay and his counter rebuttal within the first rebuttal -- before we have even read Scalia's response. This got a tad confusing and did not add much to the overall discussion.

The centerpiece of this excellent book is an essay called "Common Law Courts in a Civil Law System," where Justice Scalia outlines and defends his theory of statutory and constitutional interpretation. The second part of the book has reactions from three law professors and an historian. Scalia then responds in a (testy) Afterwards that suggests that he doesn't take criticism well.

Scalia, a judge, believes that judges seek to grab power by covertly making laws. Prior to the 20th century, they made laws by manipulating common law precedents in the guise of "interpretation." The adoption of the Constitution and the growth of written laws should have ended this chicanery but didn't -- judges used the concept of "legislative intent" to evade the clear meaning of statutes and invented the notion of an "evolving constitution" to rewrite constitutional law as they saw fit.

To combat these evils, Scalia wants judges to decide cases by applying the "original meaning" of a statute or constitutional clause -- a strategy he calls "textualism." He has many intelligent things to say about statutory interpretation. Unfortunately, his theory of constitutional interpretation is a mess. Nothing in the text of the Constitution endorses "textualism" or any other rigid interpretive approach; on the contrary, the document's many vague, open-ended clauses made it inevitable that courts would create a "common law" of the Constitution. Historical investigations into "original meaning" may not yield certain, non-manipulable results, as shown by the disagreements among historians in this area. Clauses such as the First Amendment may not have had a clear "original meaning" at all.

No one in 2003, not even conservative jurists, really wants the country to be ruled by the "original meaning" of the Constitution. Freezing the Constitution in the understandings of 1791 or 1868 would only lead to permanent divisive pressures to amend the Constitution in ways that would probably horrify conservatives like Scalia. The Justice knows this. He accepts the legitimacy of stare decisis as an exception to textualism, even though it requires judges to uphold "wrong" Constituional decisions. He also knows that courts grappling with novel areas like TV broadcasting will find little guidance in the "original meaning" of the First Amendment: as Scalia concedes, "In such new fields, the Court must follow the trajectory of the First Amendment" -- "trajectory" being Scalia's euphemism for a Constitutional "common law."

The biggest disappointment is Scalia's failure to give an historically-informed, "inside" view of how the Supreme Court adjudicates cases, weighs political and legal factors, and adapts the Constitution to changing social circumstances in a way that preserves the Court's legitimacy. This would have given the reader a basis for deciding whether or not our affairs are sensibly arranged. Instead, Scalia reverts to the cliche that judicial lawmaking is undemocratic. He's right, it is, big deal. So is the Senate. So is the electoral college. And so are many other exceptions to pure democracy that Americans have put up with over the centuries. The question is not whether a limited judicial role in lawmaking is undemocratic. The question is whether it is bad.

To answer that question, we need to know how institutions function and interact in practice. Scalia fails on this score, reverting to cliches rather than analysis. True, federal judges are unelected -- but they are also above the fray of everyday politics, do their business case by case, give reasons for their decisions, and are subject to long-distance political control through the appointments process. Legislators, on the other hand, are indeed elected by the voters -- but they are also corruptible, short-sighted, subject to sleazy pressures, and unrepresentative of the electorate (how many black women are in the Congress?). Scalia should have discussed these institutional realities. Instead, he grinds an axe on behalf of a theory of adjudication that has never been followed in practice and never will be -- least of all by him.

"A Matter of Interpretation" is brief, thought-provoking, and jargon-free. The subject matter is important. It deserves a rating of five stars. I gave it only four because Scalia himself deserves only three.

This book documents the claim that bloodline of Jesus exists in the royal families of Europe. This is a claim that has been made in other books but this book has more detailed documents to support this claim. There are many many books listed for further reading. Even though there is a ton of information the author does an amazing job in writing this as a great epic story. It is a good read if you are interested in the history and evolution of the original Christian religion versus the Roman Catholic church. Many subjects are explored. The crucifixion, the holy grail, the druids, ancients symbols, sacred geometry, Knights of Templar, the great cathedrals, Egyptian mysteries etc.
If you already know about the history of Constantine and the ways he controlled the church and the editing of the Bible you will not be as shocked as the other reviewer rating this book , but you will still find lots of other new bits and pieces of interesting facts and theories.

If you have strong faith (Catholicism, Christianity) and believe in the literal written and fundamental English translated language of the Bible, this book is not for you. It is principally for theologians and historians, who accept Jesus to have been a human man and not divine. He altered the course of history, that is for sure and established Christianity from his native Israel into present day Western society. Gardner quotes from sources that are rare and hard to find, older books from medieval sources, and uses art and tarot cards and the myth of Arthur and the Holy Grail in their connection to the truth about Jesus. He proposes that he was of the Qumran community (where the Dead Sea Scrolls were found) and he married Mary Magdalene. He did not die on the cross and instead had someone else die in his place. From Magdalene, he was given a lineage, many of which lived their life as early Christian priests. This I can believe, but the claim that kings and queens of France and England (the Stewarts, etc) were descendants of Jesus/Mary is only a desire to claim "divine right of kings." This book is full of mystery and realism, that it can be like cracking a code to seperate fact from fiction. That is our job to do. Nevertheless, let the faithful be faithful. Believe what works for you. This is a great book. Changed my way of thinking. Look for his other books revolving around the Grail.

Laurence Gardner is a highly educated historian, antiquarian, etymologist and a very well-rounded spiritualist. The core of his beliefs revolve around the Holy Grail and its links to the lineage of Jesus Christ. In his first of three books, he gives us a historic and letter-to-letter interpretation of the Gospels. The fundamentalist and Church-sponsored Christian, or perhaps even orthodox Jew, will not benefit from Gardner's information. These would more than likely deem this material blasphemy and heresy. Only the open-minded, enlightened individual who seeks truth in biblica sources and mystic writings will treasure his works.

Gardner begins by writing a prologue in defense of democracy and a people-serving government, based on the Grail code of service. He further acknowledges that religion has been male-dominated for the most part and the Bible edited by imperialist Roman Catholics (later by fundamentalist Christians) so that the readers would not discover a very important truth: Jesus was not divine, but in fact a human Jewish priest who sought a new reform in traditional Judaism which would become Christianity.

He was married to Mary Magdalene (of whom the Bible refers to as a prostitute or "sinner" but who is the only woman to be waiting by Jesus' tomb in a demonstration of wifely duty). He produced a lineage of priests and priestesses, Christian leaders who effectively worked to support the early churches in Imperial Rome. But Jesus' heirs came into conflict with the Catholic church, who supressed everything under dictatorial control of Renaissance art and through the misinterpretation of the original Hebrew words in the bible. I.E. Mary, Jesus' mother, the Virgin Mary, was called simply a virgin (Hebrew Almah) because she was sexually inexperienced and young, when she was espoused to Jesus' father Joseph. The "Holy Spirit" is another matter, the blessing by the "angel" Gabriel to have the infant Jesus was really the blessing of a priest. The book explains a lot of the misinterpretated words and phrases in the Gospels, which the Apostles wrote with full knowledge that the Roman empire was after such "New Age" thought. Christianity, at this time in history, which was polytheistic, was considered strange and "New Age".

Many who have read this book do not want to believe that Jesus did not die on the cross as Gardner claims (Gardner claims Jesus was only wounded and instead of resurrected he was "healed" by his followers. He would die later, Jesus, says as he escaped opressors into India) But whether he lived or not, the lineage of Jesus did in fact thrive for some time and Gardner hints at this through the barrage of hidden meanings in artwork tarot cards and the cycle of Arthurian legends. The Holy Grail, above all, is the unifying element. The Grail cup in essence, represents the womb, and the blood of Jesus represents his physical bloodline of heirs. But the spiritual and political sides of it represent Jesus' very desire for a united, peaceful, people-serving government. Jesus, in many ways, opened the doors for new spiritual thought into the West. This book is the first of three books by Gardner- a trilogy which further explores the fascinating "hidden" meanings of Bible books such as Genesis and their connections with the Messianic bloodline, as well as the subtle contexts in fairy tales and Wiccan themes. Again, this book is for the non-judgemental and open minded person. No one has all the answers, not even Gardner's large-scale information, but it's our right to seek the truth.

If you want to read about Jack Kennedy and his dad, with a little more information about Joe Jr., then this is a book for you. Mr. Leamer never delivers the promise his title suggests. This is not to say the book fails to be interesting, but it paints a rather incomplete picture of the Kennedy history. He spends a great deal of time on Joe Sr, and goes through a fairly deep analysis of the relationship between Joe Jr. and John, but we se only fleeting glimpses of Ted as he runs for senate. We only see detail on Bobby when he becomes his brothers AG. We never see the depth of information on Bobby, who played such a significant part in JFK's life.

The book also fails to give a complete picture of any of the men by failing to explaing the relationship that occurred with Rose. We are shown that she tolerated her husband's indiscretions, but we see hardly any interplay with her sons at all. Any decent psychologist will tell you that you can't understand a man without understanding his relationship with his mother. We never see it at all.

Although I found the information delivered to be interesting, I also found it to be quite one-sided, as though it had been written by a strong fan. It gave a good amount of information into the events the Kennedy men lived (and died) through, yet left out much of the day to day information that would have filled out the image. Bottom line; interesting read, but not a detailed analysis...not by a long shot.

I read The Kennedy Women a few years ago and found it to be one of the most impressive biographical works that I had ever encountered. I was most impressed with Leamer's ability to fully chart the lives of so many diverdse characters.

I eagerly awaited the Kennedy Men. If I had not read his previous work, this probably would have seemed better. I felt that the Kennedy Women had a broader scope dealing with a longer (and earlier!) time frame and more individuals. This started, really with Joe Kennedy and didn't focus on too many others. A very minor complaint, is that the Kennedy women had a comrehensive time line in the beginning. It would have been useful to include one here as well.

Otherwise, this is an extaordinarily well rearched volume. What I enjoyed most was the conversational approach taken by Leamer. It is a pleasure to read. I wish that the final chapter "Requiem for a President" was slightly more detailed, but this was a chance to learn not about invididuals, but about complex family relationships and bonds.

I am glad that I read it and look forward to volume 2!

When the next Kennedy tragedy or triumph occurs, make sure this book "The Kennedy Men" is nearby, because it anticipates today what will probably become headlines tomorrow. The author Laurence Leamer tells the real truth about the accomplishments and the failures of the Kennedy family and their charismatic male leaders. This is an accurate and well-researched account of the power-driven Kennedy men, beginning with the Patriach, Joe Kennedy whose leachery and treachery in business, politics, and sex has never been more accurately researched than in this work. Leamer exposes new, shocking and valuable information about John F. Kennedy, his Presidency, and his brothers Joe Jr.,Bobby and Ted. We learn that JFK ordered napalm to be dropped on Cuban citizens during the Bay of Pigs invasion. Few Americans know how extensively JFK taped personal and telephone conversations until Leamer describes them in detail the conversations. This book documents how sorely afflicted JFK was by medication, injury, and emotional stress. By the time the bullets strike JFK in Dallas, the reader sighs with relief that the President is finally out of lifelong physical pain and severe emotional stress, and sexual dysfunction. Leamer shows the bad and the good in the Kennedy clan, much of it unreported or uninterpreted before. Secret files from the CIA, FBI, and Secret Service files are revealed in this book to document both the acheivements and glory of Camelot. Every glamorous accomplishment and detail about JFK, Jackie and Kennedy family members is well researched in these pages, just as are the dirty little secrets of petty jealousies and passions that racked the Kennedy men as they live out their spectacular lives of high drama as America's unofficial royal family. Open this book to any page and be hooked into one of the best told and most fully researched biographical histories about the Kennedy men you can find. You will need it for tomorrow's headlines!

The Peter Principle is an excellent book, if you want to know the secret to FAILURE.

Laurence Peter's self-proclaimed principle that "each person rises to their highest level of incompetence" only serves to demonstrate Peter's dislike for people and his own failure in life. It has been said that it takes no more than to read the first chapter of any book to determine whether or not the author likes people, meaning that the author is truly interested in telling a story, sharing facts regarding an issue or teaching a new-found knowledge to the reader. Peter on the other hand, begins assuming that people are inherently failures, and it is only a matter of time and effort before they become that. Peter's self-fulfilling prophesy, eeerrr, theory, is no better demonstrated than in his own book, the Peter Principle. It was the transition to his highest level of incompetence.

I would not recommend this book to anyone who believes in leadership, success, the trail and tribulations on the road to success and the richness and diversity of people and the endurance of the human spirit.

Napoleon Hill wrote in his book: Think and Grow Rich and I will paraphrase: The difference between those who are truly successful and those who are not is this, there are those who fail, fail and fail, then give up; they are the unsuccessful in life. Then there are those who fail, fail and fail, then get up; they are the truly successful. Unfortunately, Peter didn't realize the importance of encouraging people to succeed, instead he chose only to present the scenario that if you've done well, stop at that, you couldn't possibly get any better?!

I suggest to the Amazon.com readers to save their time and money from this book.

"The Peter Principle; why things always go wrong" by Dr. Laurence J. Peter and Raymond Hull, William Morrow & Company, Inc., New York, 1969, 179 pages in paperback. The Peter Principle: In a Hierarchy Every Employee Tends to Rise to His Level of Incompetence. The author provides an insightful analysis of why so many positions in so many organizations seem to be populated by employees who exhibit signs of incompetence. A most disturbing concept since we all tend to all rise to our own level of incompetence. This concept is likely to be ignored by most senior managers and consultants since to admit it is to admit that we may also be at our own level incompetence. Ignorance is bliss? The end result is that non-growing companies are more likely to have incompetent employees at many levels of the organizational structure whereas growing companies add new positions and employees so fast that the inevitable results of the Peter Principle may be forestalled as long as growth continues. "Employees", as the author points out, "do not want to be incompetent", but when management offers promotions that put the employees into their level of incompetence, the employees have no way of knowing that ahead of time. After all, if the offer is made it is because management "knows" the employee can do the job competently. Many managers are at their level of incompetence thus they make these poor selections.

Look at the bell-curve. Not the controvertial book by Herrnstein and Murray, but the statistical bell curve used in grading and whatnot. The bell curve proves two things:

1) One half of the people you meet--that is every other person you meet--is below average.

2) Only 1/4 of the people you meet are really smart--those of the upper quartile--and in a democracy they will always be out voted.

Our hope is in that upper 25%, yet they will always be in a minority, with the lesser 75% of us misunderstanding them, or dragging them down.

Now you see how this book makes sense!

Keep in mind that a theory is only as good as it's data. Luckily, we can verify the Peter Principle rather easily. Just look around your workplace, and look at what goes on. You will see the Peter Principle in al it's glory.

A painfully true book!

First of all let me state that you must already have a certain concept of trading and trading terminology to benefit from this book. You must also understand and believe the importance of chart reading as a trader to fully understand what the authors are saying. I believe some of the negativity written about this books is because the readers didnt understand trading concepts as applied to chart reading or disregard chart reading altogether as a valid tool to trading.

With this said, I have to say that the book was beneficial for me as a short term trader. It helped me find patterns that I would've otherwise overlooked before reading this book. Let me also add that the turtle soup and turtle soup plus one does not really apply 100%, per say, to the fast momentum stocks I screen for. However, reading those strategies helped fine tune my entry and exit strategies when I enter a trade. It did so by helping me look for intraday swings and the probabilities of possible price action for next day trading based on what happened to the price at the close. If anything, the book helped me alot because it opened my mind to other trading possibilities and thus form ideas for myself.

Like another reader said, the authors are not mechanical traders. Thus these patterns and strategies should not be taken mechanically. Instead one should trade cautiously using discretionary stops. The book will only teach you about patterns in the market that have a high probable outcome. It's up to the individual to trade the patterns and use protective stops in the case the anticipated move goes wrong.

Street Smarts is destined to be a "classic". You have two of the most well known figures in the trading world team up together to produce a tactical manual to conquer the markets.

I read and re-read the book all the time, branching off from their strategies to create new ones that I can use in my daily attack on the markets.

It's a must read for any one serious about trading.

Street Smarts is the perfect title for this book which was written by two savvy and very successful futures traders. Linda Bradford Raschke and Laurence Connors share some of the best contrarian trading strategies that you will ever lay your eyes on. Of particular interest are the Turtle Soup Plus One and the Turtle Soup strategies that key on false breakouts. These strategies can be applied both intra-day and on a position trading basis and are guaranteed to make you money. Read this book. It is no frills, just excellent trading strategies from two pros.