In many circles, the most often given reasons for the decline of American cities are highways and tax-deductible mortgages. This book is good because it gives a much fuller picture of what really happened. Nobody wanted to live, or could live, in an integrated neighborhood.

A conclusion I drew from this book was that the French (who usually annoy me) handled their urban problems much better than we did. Instead of dropping housing projects in the middle of cities where the projects slowly-but-surely eroded the surrounding urban fabric, the French located their projects outside of cities, where no preexisting neighborhoods were affected.

Even though projects there are as bad as projects here, at least no one was displaced.

The biggest thing this book is missing is an epilogue. Published in 1985, the book is kinda dated.

This case study of Canarsie New York and the 1970's shows vividly how racism is not always a product of distant media stereotypes, but rather real day to day contacts between the races. Professor Rieder, who was my professor last year while I attended Columbia, clearly indicates how liberals, and especially the liberal elites failed. The limosine liberals on the upper east side would vote for school busing in the abstract because they did not have to deal with the consequences. THose lower-middle class whites who saw blacks moving in and property values declines became resently towards the liberal estabilshment. It was these former new deal Democrats who switched to Ronald Reagan in 1980 and, who before that, provded Nixon a great percentage of his "silent majority." As a liberal, and a rich one at that, it made me think of the impact that liberal policies have on the ground.

This is, to say the least, one of the greatest books ever published in regard to the recent political change we have seen. What is it that has led some former left-wing liberal New Deal Democrats to turn into conservative Democrats - and on occasion Republicans - who backed Reagan and Bush and bucked President Carter and pro-union Democrat Walter Mondale? This book points at the issue of the "culture war" in regard to race and ethnicity. The author points at every issue which the Republican Right has used - crime, "welfare," government waste, etc. - and how it all points back toward the issue of race. The author is right in his declaration that liberalism and progressivism must begin to take the wishes and dreams of working class white families seriously - as well as their sympathies.

Racism is, obviously, wrong and immoral. Yet, liberals and Democrats must begin to listen to why people give in to right wing racism. If they do, then they will hear the wishes and concerns of the white working class and can begin to form an inclusive and truly compassion answer to these problems, without the scowl of Pat Buchana, Ronald Reagan, Barry Goldwater or George Bush. Problems - even the racist fears of whites - can be solved in a compassionate manner. Nay, they must be solved in such a manner.

Yes, it is true that most working class folks - even white ones - are self described Democrats. How can't they be? Yet, it is true that on occasion may drift from the party of FDR and unto the right for certain candidates. Why? Racial fears. Progressives must learn to prevent this. This book shows us how we can.

This is what happens when you take esotericism too far. Lampert should have better heeded Strauss' warning that textual clues must be supportable in some measure by the text itelf--or else pondered Strauss' argument that "the problem inherent in the surface of things . . . is the heart of things."

I spent some time checking out the claims of this book--which, in brief, are that the mature Strauss was a covert Nietzschean nihilist who believed in a politically significant order of rank among men--and I was totally unconvinced. If you're going to argue that a man secretly harbored beliefs directly at odds with ideas he dedicated 30 years of his life to advancing, you have to make a better case than this.

Similar things have been written about Strauss and Machiavelli, and they are similarly unbelievable. Memo to would-be esotericists: the device is almost never used directly to contradict a surface argument. Rather, it is used to conceal, while at the same pointing to, the deepest implications of that argument.

Nonetheless, I give this book two stars because it is not deviod of insight into Nietszche.

Despite the disputations of many Straussians, the connections between Strauss and Nietzsche are clear and, to the reader of both, undeniable. As Lampert points out on several occasions with a quote from Strauss in a letter to Karl Lowith, Nietzsche was to say the least indespensible to Strauss's early development. "Nietzsche so dominated and charmed me between my 22nd and 30th years that I literally believed everything I understood of him." (p 5) Thus considering the not so veiled attempt of most Straussians to distance their man from Nietzsche it is not surprising they would claim that Strauss himself should not be read esoterically (least of all by someone seeking to 'blow his cover'). A cursory review of two prominent but very different Straussians, Stanley Rosen (who is not so concerned with protecting Strauss's image) and Harvey Clafin Mansfield (who is), is enough to lend credence to Lampert's thesis. Rosen states plainly the connection between Strauss and Nietzsche in his 'Hermeneutics as Politics': "...Strauss is almost Nietzschean but not quite.." (p 125). As for Mansfield, his studies of Machiavelli are more Nietzschean than Strauss himself. Just try this on for size as a Nietzschean quote: "To us, Machiavelli contributes a clear view of politics unobstructed by abtract claims for equality and unreasonable demands for justice." 'Machiavelli's Virture,' University of Chicago Press, 1996. p. xiv

Lampert's work is a thorough and insightful reading of Strauss's essay "Note on the Plan of Nietzsche's 'Beyond Good and Evil'." Lampert's approach is definitely more Nietzchean than Straussian, which is to say it is not as nuanced or sufficiently ambiguous as Straussians--especially of the theistic flavor--like. But it is in a word outstanding and will hopefully embolden a few of Struass's more reticent students to step out of the shadows and into the Noon sunlight, in more Zarathustrian fashion.

"Leo Strauss and Nietzsche" is the 3rd book from the great Laurence Lampert, who is probably the greatest living Nietzsche scholar in the English speaking world. It seeks to examine the following possibility: that Strauss, himself the rediscoverer of the art of "esoteric" writing, whereby one produces philosophical works in a subtle way that masks one's real teachings so as to not arouse the fury of established ideology, may himself have been an esoteric writer, and more specifically, an advocate of Nietzscheanism. At first glance, nothing would seem to be further from the truth - Strauss is widely thought of as being a sort of Platonist, at least in political philosophy. But the question needs to be asked - would he have ignored the tool he himself rediscovered? What might be found if he was subjected to the very analysis he performed on others?

This is what Lampert does, using a 17 page essay called "Not on the Plan of Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil", in Strauss' "Studies in Platonic Political Philosophy". Lampert eventually accumulates a significant argument in favor of his two theses, namely, that Strauss was a covert Nietzschean who felt that he could not speak aloud what he himself believed and who therefore took cover under the traditional garb of a philosopher (which both Nietzsche and Strauss took to be the cassock of a priest); and that Strauss himself is the best interpreter of Nietzsche the world has yet seen. Anyone who is interested in either man should read this book. It will provide a powerful incentive to rethink stereotypes about both men and their works, and it gives a fine summary of what Nietzsche actually was trying to communicate.

While not exactly the most exciting Super Bowl ever played- the Niners pretty much had it won at halftime- this book does give the Niner/pro football fan a good look at the glitz, glamor, & hype that surrounds the 'Great American Time-Out'. The enormity of this amazing event in pro sports is depicted in the seemingly-endless array of color photos, with a bit of text here & there.

There's pre-game pics of the fans, decked out in some of the most interesting clothing & costumes ever seen as they pay tribute to their allies. There's the prepping of the field for the big day. You'll also see the players coming off the planes, the annual NFL Experience 'carnival', and go behind the scenes at rehearsals for the halftime show.

Then there's the game itself, featuring plenty of 49er highlights (Steve Young's amazing performance, Jerry Rice & Ricky Watters' two-man touchdown show, Deion Sanders' steppin') and a few Charger Moments as well (Andre Coleman's 98-yard kickoff return TD). Kathy Lee Gifford's national anthem and the 'Indiana Jones'-themed halftime show (with the Super Bowl trophy standing in for the gold idol from 'Raiders') are also depicted.

Finally, there's the post-game wrap-up, featuring stills from the victorious 49ers locker room, press conferences by both teams, and the Niner victory parade down San Francisco's main drag. Finally, a few words from commissioner Paul Tagliabue, the sentimental thoughts of Hall-of-Famers Dan Fouts & Ronnie Lott, and an appendix of game stats are included to give this book a little something aside from photos to look at.

'Late

I think the writing in this book was very good. There is actually quite a bit of it: Ronnie Lott sounds incredibly sensible, and Crumpacker's piece is a hoot. Even Tagliabue comes across less than smarmy.

I am a die-hard Charger fan, so even though we got massacred in this game, I still have a lot nostalgia of the 1994 season. It was the first year that we ever made a Super Bowl, and it was a year that I will never forget. This book brings back all of those great memories. Chargers 2000 all the way!

If you're politically liberal or a fan of PBS, you'll probably be annoyed by this book; conservatives are likely to enjoy it much more, judging from the gleeful blurbs by such luminaries as Rush Limbaugh and William F. Buckley, Jr. I found Jarvik's evidence for his main points--that PBS can survive without government funding, and that it shouldn't have such funding as long as it fails to live up to the ideal of non-partisan, or at least politically balanced, broadcasting--to be pretty substantial. But the tone of the book is often grating: Jarvik seems far too inclined to see a liberal conspiracy behind every broadcast, and his criticisms lack a sense of proportion that would make him more persuasive, at least to this (moderately liberal) reader.

Although Jarvik often has plenty of evidence for his criticisms, it is sometimes a mixed bag that he presents as if all the evidence had the same weight. For example, he goes a long way toward debunking the personal image that Moyers has made an integral part of his programs, but along the way he implies that Moyers is complicit in the alleged anti-Semitism of Joseph Campbell, while the only evidence he musters for the charges against Campbell are uncorroborated statements from an NYBR article that sound suspiciously like faculty-lounge sniping from jealous colleagues. Similarly, in illustrating Moyers's liberal bias, he includes this comment about Moyers's program FACING EVIL, which dealt with racism and Naziism: "curiously missing from the list of evil were horrors from the Communist world." This is just one of the several times Jarvik criticizes PBS for failing to seize an opportunity to say bad things about Communists--he even goes so far as to criticize a nature program, LAND OF THE RUSSIAN BEAR, for not bringing up Chernobyl.

Jarvik is also not above a little rhetorical overkill--even when the plain facts speak for themselves. He claims that underestimated construction costs on a THIS OLD HOUSE project "bankrupted" the homeowners after he has just acknowledged that they sold the house for almost twice the cost of construction. Jarvik's Foreword writer, Van Gordon Sauter, plays the same game, characterizing PBS as "a professional mendicant, living off the government dole," even though Jarvik notes that PBS depends on the federal government for only 14% of its funding.

Another favorite trick is the not-quite-fair comparison. He criticizes the program NOVA for portraying computer technology in an inappropriately "Luddite perspective in the age of the Internet and World Wide Web." To back this up, he cites programs aired in 1981, 1983, and 1990, well before the massive popularity of the World Wide Web. He also criticizes NOVA for not producing programs on some of the major science issues of the day, comparing its few dozen offerings per year to the *hundreds* of stories on all commercial television in the same year.

One wonders if a better balanced argument might have been accepted by a more established publisher than Prima, who might have saved the author from such boners as "jokes...of a...scategorical [sic] nature." Or who would have realized the dubiousness of printing blurbs from figures who are sympathetically profiled in the book (William F. Buckley, William Rusher, Milton Friedman).

Overall, a good book, though one that needs to be read critically.

It is an essential book, since it provides a counterbalance by exposing the people who run the myriad alphabet-soup organizations for connected, undemocratic hollow (wo)men ... PBS, NET, CPB, ABC, CBS, CNN, BBC. Why do I enumerate commercial companies among this list? Because the leadership of the organizations are interlocked, as much as are the boards of the major industrial and financial companies. As an example, Bill Moyers moved freely between public and commercial broadcasting. Was it because he was so powerful, or because he had allies and angels throughout these media companies?

PBS is a thorough book which covers much ground in 287 pages, while focusing on only about 10 programs or series. The other critics fail to mention the closing chapter's topic, Milton Friedman's Free to Choose, which supposedly is the only instance of conservative, ideological balance on PBS to the pervasive liberal, ideological programming. Only by using guerilla tactics (funding it themselves, going outside of the regular production centers, selling it to the independent stations, accepting poor timeslots, and shaming management into rebroadcasting it in prime slots), were the producers of Free to Choose able to beat the system.

I was surprised to learn that PBS is anti-Semitic; I would have thoug ht just the opposite. The section that dealt with this was overly long in laying out the evidence, but was short on assigning personal or cultural responsibility or offering motivation, and thereby fails to make the case conclusively by leaving important questions unanswered. The most we can say is that there is "an appearance" of anti-Semitism.

The book ends abruptly with a thud, claiming that the Friedman chapter is a suitable conclusion. I agree it is a good choice for the final topic of subject matter. However, a synopsis and conclusion by the author would have been a better final chapter. How about an organization chart, or a verbal presentation of the leadership of PBS, and the other organizations which make up the power Who do these people tend to be, and from what centers of power do they corporate sponsors, and 2 parts entertainers." What are their motives and objectives? Purely money and power, or is the money and power only a perk, and is the real objective to achieve political domination by controlling the media? (The first thing coup leaders do is to storm the radio station.)

The fact that PBS programming is coordinated with the federal election campaigns of the Democrat party candidates is most alarming. How timely that we are just starting another election campaign cycle, here in late 1999! Will the Republicans point to this book as grounds for defunding PBS, when PBS runs programs favorable to Democrat party candidates (as PBS surely will, in spite of these revelations)? Or will the Republicans keep PBS in tact in hopes of gaining control of it, if they can ever secure control of the Executive and Legislative branches of the Federal government, as the Democrats have done frequently?

For those media insiders who know the many people who are portrayed, it must be an especially exciting to get the inside scoop on their machinations. For a frequent viewer of public television like myself, many of the details presented in PBS lack context, but that's OK. I can't verify their goings-on. But enough of the onscreen characters and programs/series are familiar enough to judge that Laurence Jarvik has written and accurate and telling book, that will be ammunition for those who yearn for freedom, and for a responsible and free press.

PUBLIC TELEVISION EXPOSED © ABIP 1997 by Agustín Blázquez with the collaboration of Jaums Sutton

For taxpayers and donors of public television, Laurence Jarvik's PBS BEHIND THE SCREEN is a must. Deals, manipulations, intrigues, dirty tricks, betrayals, censorship and political bias at PBS are exposed in this book. As the secrets unfold, we begin to realize that PBS is not serving the best interests of the people who are dutifully paying its tab, and in many instances works against them.

This needed, serious, informative, matter of fact, easy to read and enlightening book provides a wealth of information otherwise not easily available. Jarvik does an admirable job putting it all together: from the Foreword by the former president of CBS News, Van Gordon Sauter, through Jarvik's introduction and thirteen chapters presenting the history of public television from Edward R. Murrow to THIS OLD HOUSE, including the telling case of Nobel Prize-winning ec onomist Milton Friedman's 1980 FREE TO CHOOSE, rebutting John Kenneth Galbraith's 1977 AGE OF UNCERTAINTY.

Jarvik exposes PBS' largely unknown, huge money making venues licensing videos, books, toys, games and other products - some of which are manufactured in China and other Asian countries notorious for their exploitive labor practices, including child labor - from its shows for children: SESAME STREET, BARNEY and MISTER ROGERS. Sufficient money to render PBS independent from government and individual support.

In spite of huge profits, PBS begs shamelessly for subsidies and donations while their executives, directors and producers - making six figure salaries - have side businesses and become multi-millionaires at the expense of the uninformed. Jarvik points out that "SESAME STREET serves as an infomercial for the 5,000-plus licensed SESAME STREET products that gross over $800 million in retail sales around the world each year." This kind of eye-opening information is important and necessary. After reading it, close your donor wallet until PBS comes clean.

The chapter on that colorful Bill Moyers is certainly worth the price of admission. I won't say more here. I don't want to spoil the fun.

It is imperative that the PBS's public understand the political struggle behind THE MACNEIL/LEHRER NEWS HOUR as well as the history of bias and inaccuracies of FRONTLINE, NOVA, THE AMERICAN EXPERIENCE's controversial episode "Liberators," and the ongoing PBS trials against conservative thought "ending" with the advent - as an act of tokenism - of William F. Buckley, Jr.'s FIRING LINE. In the fascinating chapter on Buckley, Jarvik says, "Typical of the way PBS treats conservatives is the case of Reed Irvine's response to WGBH's thirteen-hour series VIETNAM: A TELEVISION HISTORY (1983), which he believed was filled with 'inaccuracies, a lot of errors, and distortions'."

Mr. Irvine, AIM's Chairman, asked for a chance to offer a rebuttal documentary on PBS. In contrast with the National Endowment for the Humanities' $1.2 million grant for PBS' series, Irvine was offered only $30,000 which, when added to private donations totaled $100,000. Irvine's TELEVISION VIETNAM: THE REAL STORY finally aired on PBS on June 26, 1985, and Jarvik says, it "was not permitted to stand alone but was surrounded with critical interviews and commentary. Irvine was not allowed to suggest alternative reading material to compete with the PBS companion volume to the WGBH series . . .." Subsequently, Irvine was viciously attacked and snubbed by PBS.

There is much more intriguing and thought provoking material in Jarvik's book for the readers' enlightenment. My conclusion is that there is no reason for taxpayers to support PBS' attempts to reshape American thinking according to the philosophies and political beliefs of a well-entrenched elite of executives, directors and producers. Their bias favoring those utopian 19th and early 20th century thinkers is against the tide of history. They have to accept reality, stop manipulating public opinion and censoring information that doesn't conform to their socialist mold. PBS' huge profits must be used to produce programs open to all ideas and stop being taxpayers' and donors' parasites. I certainly hope Jarvik's book will bring more public thought and less public money to PBS.

© ABIP 1997

Agustín Blázquez, Producer/Director of documentary COVERING CUBA email: Jaums100@hotmail.com

I can't say it was something I liked, that would be a lie. I thought it was dull and pointless, except for the legend. I would have to give this book a three star rating because NOTHING happens. For those who like to read real life exaggerated, go ahead, I'm just not the type. On with the story. Stacy was your average middle school, having lots of friends and a little trouble at home. Everything is shifted around though when a friend of her dad's, Mr. Wong, and his family from China comes to live in the United States. As soon as Stacy meets his only daughter Hong Ch'un trouble starts and are annoying each other after five minutes. At school after lunch and a miserable morning Hong Ch'un is found with little knick-nacks that are worthless except from the people that lost them. For some reason Stacy defends Hong Ch'un and is then discriminated for the first time in her life for being Chinese. After what was probably the worst day of her life she finds out that Hong Ch'un never went home that night. With the help of her mother and grandmother she finds out that Hong Ch'un ran away to China town. On there visit to China town to find Hong Ch'un, stories are revealed, family ties are found, but will they find Hong Ch'un? Who really stole the stuff and why? Read to find out if you're interested.

There is a 1/2 american 1/2 Chinnese girl named Stacy. She has a normal life and is treated fairly. Soon a girl named Hung Chun comes to her schoo from China. A girl frames Hung Chun for stealing valuables. She soon runs away to China Town in San Franisco because she's sad and mad.

Thief of Hearts
By: Laurence Yep
Reviewed by: J.Lau
Period: 6
The book Thief of Hearts is about a half Chinese half American girl that is very popular at school until another Chinese girl comes to her school. The new Chinese girl's name is Hong Ch'un and is very protective of herself so no one liked her. When special things are stolen from people at school and turn up in Hong Ch'un's backpack, everyone blames her of being the thief until Stacy stands up for her then everyone started thinking that she was no different from Hong Ch'un. Both Hong Ch'un and Stacy's feelings are hurt but they plan to find the real thief. So Stacy's Tai-Paw makes up a trick to get the real thief. Stacy finds out that the real thief was Karen (one of her friends) and has her apologize for everything.
I liked this book because it teaches about friendship and family.
The part about friendship that I liked was when Stacy went back to school the next day and found out whom the real thief was. After the water fight with Jeff Stacy realized that the heart pin given to her from Tai-Paw was gone. The pin had a substance on it that if you touched it, it would make a exploding noise and leave color on your fingers that wouldn't come off. She ran into bathrooms looking for someone washing their hand with a stain on them. She finally found Karen in the janitor's bathroom. Stacy found out why and instead of hating Karen she learned to treat all her friends equally." And suddenly Karen was crying and hugging me."
The part that I liked about family is when Stacy realized that her mom was learning to understand Stacy. After Stacy's mom came back from sending Hong Ch'un home, she told Stacy to go to bed. Stacy didn't want to so her mom told her not to stay up too late. "I jumped up from my chair. "Mom?" When she had turned around, I hugged her. "Thanks."" They finally started to understand each other and stop fighting and that's how a real family is supposed to act.
My favorite part of the book is when Stacy and Hong Ch'un finally become friends. Everyone at school found out that the thief really was Karen so they started to like Hong Ch'un. After school that day Hong Ch'un went up to Stacy and said thank you. When she asked what she could do to repay Stacy, Stacy said to forgive Karen and try to be her friend. So Hong Ch'un said that she would and that she wanted to be Stacy's friend too. So in the end everything turned out great.

We used this book to teach an introductory Java course for experienced programmers. Without exception the students didn't like the book. They felt they really couldn't learn from it--topics are covered too quickly. They wanted a text with a more step-by-step approach and one with more examples.

If you are looking to learn real java 1.1 coding then this is the book for you. Mastering java 1.1 is one of the faw books out today that will see you have to code with java to the 1.1 spec ! !

I like the book for the way the approach is organized, and all the components, and details are patiently and thoroughly studied, no assumption is made about what you know , and the plan to this complicated program is laid out in a very understandable way

This book covers a wide variety of topics. That's good if you want to know a little bit about just about everything, but I would greatly prefer more expansive coverage of some of the more interesting aspects of sexuality. For example, the book covers "opening lines," sperm banks, infidelity, back pain, pillow talk, and several other less-than-riveting topics while giving short shrift to aphrodisiacs, pheromones, and techniques of increasing sexual pleasure. Besides being maddeningly superficial, some of the information is just plain wrong. For example, the authors mention using wild yams as an aphrodisiac. That's ludicrous. Apparently the authors' knowledge on this matter is not up-to-date, because the old supposition that yams contain a chemical (diosgenin) which can be converted into progesterone in the body has been refuted by countless medical doctors and biochemists. Even if such an endogenous transformation could be effected, progesterone is not a hormone that can increase a man's libido! If I want to hear groundless myths, I can speak with my locker room buddies; when I'm paying for a book, I expect facts instead of a rehash of tired old myths.

I first became aware of this book when Tommy Lee, of all people, held it up on MTV and said it was his favorite book. After reading it, I know why! This is a great tome to share with the man you love--perfect Christmas stocking fodder! It will provoke endless discussions and endless ... experimentations. I cannot recommend it highly enough!

So I thought that I knew enough about sex. Wrong! This book contains everything about sex that a man should have learned about sex during his life. If a man want to understand more about sex in term of loving and caring toward the partner, rather than just 15 minutes lust, read this book. This book will certainly broaden a Man's knowledge about everthing about sex.

This is supposed to be part 3 of the trilogy, but it has VERY little to do with the first 2 books (both of which I loved, BTW). The only thing in common with the first books is the character of Titus (who was a baby in the first book, so was really only a character in the second book). The first 2 books spend much (most) of their time in a rather enchanting world that is confined to a castle and the immediate area around it, yet none of this book takes place there. Much more disturbing, however, is this volume takes place in a VERY different time period than the first two books. The first 2 take place in a castle that is lit by candles and has no visible technology (the only thing that is described that was invented in the last 800 years is a reference to "guns", but they are never used and it is unknown how primitive the "guns" would be). In this book they have cars, airplanes(!), and tiny self propelled spy devices that don't even exist today! (Not to mention helmets that give you superhuman strength, and other fantastic future things - it goes from medieval castle straight to comic-book future). It is not even internally consistant - one woman flys an airplane to visit a ruin she last saw during a failed expedition to explore the unknown in one direction, an expedition that had to quit because of an unpenatratable LINE OF TREES (were the trees so tall they could stop the airplanes?). At "plot" is barely in existance, and has lots of people doing things for no rational or decernable reason (really a stark contrast to the first 2 stories, which went to some length to give you insight into the characters).
Read the first two, then skip this one - it is not only not in their league, it will actually diminish your remembered enjoyment of the first two.

I enjoyed this book very much but it IS rather different from the preceding novels (Titus Groan, Gormenghast), which are really complete as a pair. Though related it is not necessary to have read them in order to follow the action of this story.

Young Titus Groan, Lord of Gormenghast after his Father's assassination and the death of the villainous Steerforth, decides to set out to see something of the world beyond the eccentric traditions of his decayed and moribund realm. He finds a decaying and eccentric city, where he makes some allies as he becomes a nine-days wonder.

Peake excelled at depiction of a monstrous and decaying world filled with wierd eccentrics. If you like that kind of thing, you'll love this book!

To my knowlege, the only thing ever written in the English language that even comes close is Shakespeare's latter plays. For characterization, plot, description, humor, pathos and sheer gothic intensity and wonder, Peake's Gormenghast trilogy may be without parallel in all of human literature.

Read it and find out what the English language is capable of.

Pretty slim pickings for the money. If (and that's a big "if") I have the same book as the other two reviewers, I certainly could not agree less.

The ideas are old hat, the alleged research statistics not present, and, well, the good news is that I wasted a lot less time than money.

Take note, this book is not for the novice trader. I have been trading for 5 years now and have followed Connors for 3. I enjoyed this book because it gave me the nuts-and-bolts of simple, effective strategies without having to learn calculus. True, you will need to know how to get and read a moving average and ADX but once you get past this, its smooth sailing with his methods. You can probably get through this book in one short sitting but once you do, you've got strategies that will help you trade successfully for much longer than that.

As founder of "Traderscoach.com" I thought this book provided the reader with a realistic view of trading as a profession that takes time to master.

You will learn alot about trading and the approach to trading that is necessary to be a consistant winner.

Fell FREE to visit our Web-site "Traderscoach.com" which deals with Trading Psycology as well as other material realted to trading.

This book has very nice pictures of the 356. There are, however, few of the US specification Porsche. The book, being a British publication, has a lot of photos of cars produced for the UK market. There are some really beautiful cars to drool over in here!

112 pages and lots of very nice photographs (about 200), all in colour. The text is nicely wrapped around the photographs. The photographs are all especially made for this book, so they are all new and unpublished before.

The book forms an attractive and detailed guide to the Porsche 356 and the illustrations, besides being very nice, provide a good and complete reference source. It's the book to own when you like the classic lines of the Porsche 356.

A "coffee table" book (as opposed to a workshop manual). Stunning colour photographs throughout and an excellent condensed history of the type. You would not be dissapointed with this purchace. I am certainly very proud of it.