I really enjoyed this book becuase as a Christian I belive that it actually let me in on more of the bible and let me enjoy it mroe

This overview of the cold war suffers from serious omissions. First, Walker neglects to describe some of the darker aspects of the cold war such as the crimes and atrocities associated with both Soviet and US backed puppet dictators. In particular, he never discusses how the US overthrew democratically elected governments in Latin America and replaced them with brutal dictatorships friendly to American businesses...Guatamala especially comes to mind. The oppression of Eastern Europe as it came under Soviet domination under Stalin also deserves more attention.

Second...little is written concerning the numerous conflicts related to the cold war in Africa and Mid East such as in Angola and Ethiopia. The role of China in the cold war could also have been discussed and analysed in more detail. Instead, the author goes into a long tedious discourse on the disruption of the world monetary and economic systems due to the Cold War arms build-up and other related policies. Thus besides failing to discuss important topics the author takes an exciting and intriguing subject and presents it in a booring and tedious manner.

This book is a good overview of the cold war, and covers the major events, often drawing on hard-to-find sources.

It's also pretty balanced, not conservative, and not terribly liberal. I almost stopped reading when Walker drew a weak parallel between the resistance to racial integration in the American South to the Soviet massacre of 3,000 innocent Hungarians in 1956, but this was the only abomination before the last chapter of the book, so I continued. (HOW can a person compare American police using riot-tactics to Soviet tank crews mopping Hungarian-puree off their tank treads?)

However, in the final chapter, Walker unfairly criticizes America as having won the Cold War, but having more in common with the USSR than her European allies. For example, Walker dared to compare the 100-some executions of convicted criminals in America to the millions of innocents and dissidents murdered by Communist repression.

So, up to the last chapter, this is an excellent book, but it tapers off dramatically.

in an age where it seems to be accepted that ronald reagan won the cold war against the evil and godless commies, it was wonderful to see such an openminded history. walker tells it like it is, regardless of what the american establishment would want you to think. which isn't at all to say that this book glorifies the ussr... stalin's purges and gulag are given due space, as are the atrocities of eastern europe. but walker does not shy away from dean acheson and john dulles's dishonest exaggerations of the soviet threat, reagan's illegal wars and democracy-toppling, the stupidity and moral hypocricy of vietnam, and the strongly political machinations behind the scenes in washington. walker has done his research, and his arguments are fact-based through and through. the only person who really comes out seeming good is mikhail gorbachev, although even he was eventually phased out by his own revolution. definitely worth looking into, especially if you want to be able to understand the cold war objectively.

Normally, I dont review books I havent fully read. I make an exception for this one. I picked this garbage up at a book store and flipped through it a little. I came across a passage where the author tried to justify Clinton's draft dodging ways by stating that Clinton wanted to be President and most Presidents with military service backgrounds served in the Navy. This of course begs the question of why Clinton didnt join the Navy. Knowing this , or any other tough question would never be answered, I put the book down.

I did read the bio of Mr. Walker on the jacket cover too. He is far from non-partisan as other reviewers describe. He attended Oxford with Clinton and his background screams Socialist.

I see this book is out of print. A wise decision there!

All things considered, this book has to be considered a disappointment. Its title, "The President We Deserve," is somewhat misleading. It suggests the promise of explanation. Why do we deserve Bill Clinton? How do we deserve him? The book's introduction suggests that what will make this work unique is the ability to place Mr. Clinton within the "context" of his times. This is an intriguing premise. But it never materializes. Instead, what we get is exerpts from Bob Woodward's "The Agenda" and Elizabeth Drew's "On the Edge" but without the quality writing style. I still believe that a book placing Mr. Clinton within a generational context is a highly promising endeavor. Newt Gingrich, Hillary Clinton, George W. Bush, and Bill Bennett are all Baby Boomers. A look at how Vietnam, the civil rights movement, and the sexual revolution shaped their personal lives and political ideologies would be fascinating. But, unfortunately, my fellow readers, we just have to wait.

Even before Monica-gate, there were way too many Clinton books. Some of them magazine articles padded out to book length (Elizabeth Drew). Some with axes to grind and ponderous writing (like Bob Woodward). Some written by right wing nuts who have no idea how to write or conduct research. This book is great---written by someone who has perspective (it probably helps that he isn't an American), wit, and skill with words. It will make you think about Clinton about yourself in new ways.

I grew up in the Methodist Church, and my parents are life-long devout Methodists. We often joke about "methodizing" and Methodist ways -- so natually, I thought this would be a funny treat for my Mom. I was disappointed -- the book is full of one-liners, most of which present the Methodist church as a liberal, female-friendly, ecumenical organization. Granted, the church has (thank goodness) become must more open-minded over the years, but not to the extent this booklet implies. I could relate only to one or two of the jokes, and even they were lame. I didn't find any of them laugh-out-loud funny. No doubt, the Methodist Church is large and congregations and practices vary from church to church. I'm sure that there are a handful of Methodists out there who might find this funny. However, even though I have attended several Methodist churches over the years, I didn't particularly relate to this, nor did I find it funny. I wouldn't recommend purchasing this little cheaply-produced booklet (which looks like a freebie you could pick up the on the shelves in the narthex, right next to the Upper Rooms -- and it's not even blessed with a nice paper cover or any four-color illustrations) unless having something titled says "You Might Be a Methodist If . . . " is, in & of itself, amusing to you.

I found this book to be amusing, but a number of the jokes about Methodists could easily be applied to many of the mainline Christian denominations. Ah, well, Methodists have never been known for being very funny.

Great one liners. Leaves you wishing the book was longer with more punch lines!