I LOVE IVERSON he is an true role model. He went through alot as a child and teen and still going through pure hell as an adult. He shows me that you should never give up and forget where you come from. If you have an goal and dont understand Iverson and you only know him as an ball player and dont know why he has so many fans you should read this book. It made me think and rewind my thoughts on the game of basketball and look at him as a total different person. Hes a true role model and thats why true fans like me dont look at him and just see cornrows and tattoos we see an awesome gift from god and a pro at the game of life as well

I thought the book was very entertaining, mainly because of my love for the man the book was based on. I think he is great basketball player and I have never known a point guard to score like him. Although we live two different lifestyles, I admire you because you shine regardless! I love that about you. My personal advice to Allen Iverson is to keep your head up and continue ballin'. The next Director of Public Relations for a team in the league, Miss La'Keisha

WHATZ UP TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN, I JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF THINGSTO SAY TO/ABOUT ALLEN IVERSON. I LOVE YOU AND KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK.

We in group "one-three" of IXP5, really thought this book was a ripper.

"This is the most important book of the decade." Around Town, WETA-TV, Washington, D

This book presents an attractive and appealing introduction for children. It provides brief biographical notes (1-2 sentence) and many of the poems and prose are simply snippets, but it's designed to whet the appetite for something more, something it does admirably.

Have you ever tried to teach a classroom of 30 or more 8th graders of varying abilities to read and focus? Try it, and I recommend this book in your classroom, also a textbook called African American Literature (Holt, Rinehart, & Winston), lyrics to new popular songs and golden oldies... etc.

Back to the book, VERY much fun. Has poetry by Langston Huges, Gwendolyn Brooks, etc. A plethora of unique artwork! Interesting biographical notes in the back of the famous African Americans referred to in the book such as James Baldwin, Lucille Clifton, and Jimi Hendrix.

This bok is great book for starters! I really do recomend it for starters. Other than that its an ok book. You can master the book in 3-4 days, and a magic book should last much much much longer. I do however recomend this book for people who are intrested in starting card magic.

This is not an excellent book, but it's not a bad book either. It's a good book: it contains tricks for you who doesn't know sleight of hand and for you who knows it. The self-working tricks contained here are not dumb, they do have that great climax too. You'll also find some tricks that require gimmicked decks, such as the Stripper Deck, but most of them only require a normal deck and/or usual props such as a rubber band. If you look for some classic tricks but not the one's shown on TV, you'll be happy to own this book.

This book has a wealth of information on card handling and technique. There are many top notch card effects including some different and offbeat tricks. Charles Jordan was definetely a card genius and you will see why in the way his card magic is done. A must have!

This text provides a quick, concise review of the pimary topics covered on emergency medicine exams. I found it to be a good way to prepare for inservice exams and the written boards.

This book is on the HQDA Recommended Reading list! Enjoy!

Two things struck me while reading this book, the first is that I doubt there is a book out there that is truly balanced and not somewhat biased. The second thing was that Gore really got the shaft, not so much by the recount wars, but by the election official that came up with the Butterfly Ballot. In the history of the USA this decision ranks up there with new Coke and the XFL, what a mistake. As far as the reporting in the book it was not bad for a review of all the articles they had in the paper, but it did not really dig into the particular issues very deeply. I wanted more detail and behind the scenes with both the candidates. I also wanted more details on the court cases; I felt like the sky-high overview of the issues of the cases did not do such an important issue justice.

In reading the book I think a little bit of a democratic bias comes out, just a little, but enough to notice. I also thought it interesting that they had far more details of the Gore group then the Bush camp, it follows the perception that the Post is somewhat liberal in its views. The book is an overview that came out almost 10 minutes after Gore hung up the phone on the second concession call so there are a few more details out now that they did not get in the book. Overall it is a good effort and a readable book, but not the end all be all on the subject.

This book, by the editors of the Washington Post, does a good job of describing the events which led to the deadlocked 2000 Presidential election. In addition to detailing the paths which led to the deadlock, the book discusses all the post-election issues in a very readable format. Surprisingly, the books editors seem only slightly tilted towards Gore (especially considering it is the Washington Post, which is noted for its liberal bias), so no matter who you voted for, there is much to be found here for anyone with an interest in contemporary politics.

I personally think the Washington Post and NY Times are liberal rags that are generally not worth the paper they are printed on. However, in fairness, when they do well I think they should be commended. I read the NY Times "36 Days" and still think that book was not worth the paper it was printed on. It was nothing more than a reprint of their articles.

Conversely, though, Deadlock was a well-written book. Two passages are worth noting. The first is about the book itself. About one-third of the way into the first chapter the book says: "These are the ... decisions, alliances, power plays, snap judgments and personality flaws revealed when a flukishly close election is played out for staggering high stakes. Both sides were nimble and brilliant and occasionally shady; both sides were also capable of miscalculations, divisions and blame. The best and worst of politics were on displayed in those 36 days, and both sides trafficked in each. This is how it happened." Although the Post endorsed Al Gore (no surprise) they tried to be equal in their appraisal of how the two campaigns sought resolution in their favor.

As for the two sides' strategy one only has to look within the first three pages of Chapter 2 where the Post records that the Democrats enlisted the services of three authors who wrote "The Recount Primer". The book reads: "Anyone who read and heeded the booklet could predict how the two sides would play America's closest president election -- at least in the broad outlines. Gore would gamble; Bush would stall. Gore would preach a doctrine of uncounted ballots; Bush would extol the dependability of machines. Gore needed more: more counting, more examination, more weighing and pondering of more ballots. Bush needed it over while he was still ahead." The only trouble for the Gore forces with this gospel was that the Republicans knew the same gospel. The book attempted to show how the two sides played out the roles assigned them.

For a behind the scenes objective look at the two sides, I think the Post did a very decent job. This could have been a... job on the Republicans and conservatives, but generally it was not (though I expected it). It could have been a... job on the Democrats and liberals, but it was not (nor did I expect it). I am not accustomed to this degree of fairness from the liberal Washington Post nor do I expect to see it very often in the future.

The author tries to debunk Darwin's theory of evolution. He states that he has a sweeping case against Darwin, and will show the flaws of his arguments and the lack of supporting evidence. Amazingly he not only fails, but in all 13 error-ridden chapters makes a fool of himself by showing his ignorance about science and evolution. The other amazing thing is that Phillip Johnson, the ID guru, endorsed it. It clearly raises the issue of whether Johnson is really interested in the truth. This is the worst book I've ever read. People like this should not be allow to write such time wasting drivel.

I have not read this book. I HAVE read Janet Browne's magisterial bio of Darwin (second volume due fall 2002, whoo-hoo!) and other books on Darwin and on evolution. I urge the reviewer from DC, below, as well as any who might be inclined to agree with him/her, to read Janet Browne. Again, I haven't read THIS book, nor do I intend to. Evolution is hardly a theory anymore, people; it's demonstrable fact. Accept it.

After having met Duane Schmidt (read my below review), i was able to ask him about his target audience. "My audience are the 90% of Americans who believe who believe in God," he replied.

Not all of this 90% are creationists, and many (as i said below) will find some of the phrases foreign. But it gave me a clearer idea of his target audience.

Schimdt is publishing a second book; a version of this book, but for teenagers. I mentioned that many adults may find it more useful than this one, and he agreed. That one may be more accessible to those not familiar with evolutionary biology.