The Wine Project is a well written and researched book. It appeared Mr. Irvine enjoyed his subject. As with the development of many industries, there is usually someone behind the scenes who was instrumental to the success of that industry and is only known within that industry. Dr. Clore, Mr. Irvine's collaborator is that person. For anyone interested in the history and development of the Washington wine industry this is a book that needed to be written and needs to be read.

Anyone, ranging from a wine professional, enthusiast, home winemaker or a person just interested in another aspect of Washington State history, will find this book full of insight into the beginnings and future of the world class wines of Washington, the land it is grown in and the past and present players involved. It is told in large part by the leading scientist who helped create the industry in Washingon. While at times clumsy due to its occasional stringing together of anectodal passages, the book remains essential to those wishing to learn more about one of the recognized emerging areas in the world for the growing of premium grapes and the resulting production of fine wines.

I enjoyed a local telephone conversation with Ron regarding his research on the 'Island Belle' grape stock. My personal interest in this variety dates back years, when my uncle cultivated the "Island Belle" and sold to a local NW Washington winery. His informative and helpful suggestions sold me on buying this book.

I would doubtlessly recommend Ivanhoe to read. History may be often dull but Sir Walter Scott makes history extremely exciting by romanticizing his novel. It directly deals with hatred between the Normans and the Saxons, the discrimination of the Jews, chivalry, and politics--but it is a unforgettable tale of heroism, honor, and love. I felt that the characters were so fascinating and fun to read about. I was enjoying and cheering on the good characters like Ivanhoe, King Richard, and Robin Hood to beat the hated and evil villains. I liked the idea of love added in the story, like how Rowena and Rebecca were both in love with Ivanhoe. I even felt a little sorry for Brian de Bois-Guilbert who would do anything for Rebecca's love but is constantly rejected. I thought how it was appealing how the author questions Ivanhoe and Rebecca's feelings for each other. Suspenseful and action sequences also added entertainment to the story. This book may be a little too detailed for some readers, but I didn't mind. I felt that the details were brilliantly used to decorate the story in an outstanding fashion. The old English wording made me feel like I was actually in the medieval England. I have to admit that it took a great deal of persistence for me to finish this book and it was a challenge for me to read. However, I found Ivanhoe to be a wonderful pleasure. It is no wonder that Ivanhoe is such a well-loved tale!

I enjoyed this adventure yarn on many levels.

I was glad to learn about the Knights of Templer and that they were crusaders. I always wondered how Sam Spade in the Maltese Falcon knew that and it is because of this classic.

I was surprised that it talked so much about Robin of Lockesley. The story of Ivanhoe seemed to be the same only told by Ivanhoe's friends and not Robin's.

I thought that the DeBracyn and the Knight of Templer Brian de Bois Guilbert were pretty evil guys which made the story interesting. They were weasels when they had their backs to the wall but did preform with honor when required like when Richard gets DeBracy.

I guess I did not understand the prejudice of the time because they treated the Jews like dirt and they were so sterotypical. I really thought that the Jewish girl Rebecca was going to end up with Ivanhoe instead of that Saxon Lady Roweana. I guess you have to appreciate the times that they lived in.

It was a different look the Richard/Prince John history.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but this book, by Sir Walter Scott, was the progenitor of what was to become a venerable tradition in English letters (and in other European literatures as well): the historical romance. There have been many after IVANHOE, and frequently with a finer eye to the period in which the tale is set (for IVANHOE contains quite a number of anachronisms -- even Scott acknowledged it), but few have done it quite as well as Scott. He uses an archaic English to give voice to his characters, but one which is readily absorbed because of the speed & quality of the tale. So, though these people certainly wouldn't really have spoken as he has them speaking, they yet sound as though they should have. Peopled by many 'stock' characters and situations, this tale was fresh in its time & still reads well today -- a testament to Scott's skills as a teller of tales and a sketcher of marvelously wrought characters. In this tale of the 'disinherited knight' returning home to find the world he left turned upside down, young Ivanhoe, after a stint with King Richard in the Holy Land, must fight the enemies of his king and kinsmen anew. Yet the hero is oddly sidelined for much of the tale as events swirl around him and the brilliantly evoked villain, Sir Brian de Bois Gilbert, in the pay of Prince John, struggles to win treasure and the beautiful Rebeccah, who yet has eyes only for Ivanhoe, a knight she can never hope to win herself. There's lots of action and coincidences galore here and Robin Hood makes more than a cameo appearance, as does the noble Richard. In sum, this one's great fun, a great tale, and the progenitor of a whole genre. All those which came after owe their form to it. Worth the price and the read.

I found this book interesting. I'm an amateur historian with great interest on the Civil War and the leaders from both sides. I originally bought this book looking for more information on the Biographay and beliefs of Jefferson Davis. It does provide some insight into who he was but REMEMBER WHEN READING the authors' state that it is a defense of Jefferson Davis and what he stood for. Therefore this book definately has a slant toward defending and sugar coating who Jefferson Davis was.

The book is a defense of State Rights (and decentralized government) as opposed to a strong centralized government. Wether you support one idea or the other this book is definately worth reading to get a different point of view.

For historical reading on Jefferson Davis read his own writings and speeches from his life and service to the United States and then the Confederate States.

This book is worth the purchase price simply for the fascinating biography of Jefferson Davis. This gentleman stood head and shoulders above the sectionalist, despotic, backwoods bozo who won the election of 1860 and forced the Southern states to secede in order to preserve the Constitutional ideals handed on to them by the Founding Fathers. If Jefferson Davis, a man who proved time and again during his national career that he was concerned with the general welfare and interests of *all* the states, had run in the election of 1860 and won I believe he would have been hailed as the greatest American president since George Washington.

He was a hero of the Mexican-American War; he treated captured American Indians with honor and dignity; he was a Congressman and Senator of note who was scrupulously honest in the performance of his duties -- even to the point of not availing himself of the perks of his office; and he was probably the best Secretary of War our nation had (which to its eternal shame did not officially acknowledge his death in 1889 as all other Secretaries were acknowledged and officially mourned).

And that's only the first half of the book!

The second half is an impassioned defense of Jefferson Davis' honor and proof that he was not a traitor based on the writings of the Founding Fathers (including such centralists -- even monarchists -- as Alexander Hamilton). Based on the ideals of the Founding Fathers, as the Kennedys prove beyond doubt, Jefferson Davis was not a traitor. Abraham Lincoln and his Yankee cohorts who raped and ravaged the South in the name of "preserving the Union!" were the true traitors, indeed war criminals.

This juror's verdict? Jefferson Davis was right!

This book is: 1. A book that opens up bringing Jeff Davis to life telling us of his lifes joys and sorrows. His adventures and his sufferings. His victories and his defeats. 2. It vindicates Davis's character and faith shrugging off the lies told about him as well as John Edsmoe vindicates the Founding Fathers in "Christianity and the Constitution: The Faith of our Founding Fathers" 3. It provides some solid Constitutional points Davis and his countrymen made about states rights and secession. Davis was definatly NOT a traitor. 4. It shows the reader that the issue of slavery was not as cut and dry as television and movies would have us believe. Not everyone who owned slaves was a cruel barbaric beast. And just because the Abolitionists were called abolitionists does not mean they were interested in the well being of black people. In fact they, like the Environmentalists and Anti-Smoking crowd today, were just using the issue as a vehicle to gain control wealth and power. A great book

With American Reformers, Walters has composed a fine synthesis of secondary literature on the varied antebellum reform movements. In doing so, he argues that the reform impulse emerges out of evangelical Protestantism but by the Civil War takes a more secular turn more involved in legislating social controls than converting the hearts of individuals. As he develops this argument he addresses the different forms that this reform impulse took and organizes the book thematically. He discusses in successive chapters utopian movements and secular communitarians, abolition, the women's movement and the peace movement, temperance, health reform and spiritualism, working man's reform, and institutional reform, into which he groups mental hospitals, prisons and schools.

Walters demonstrates the secularization of reform in the realm of communitarian societies. Thus, the early nineteenth century utopian settlements that often emerged out of pietistic impulses gave way to more secular experiments in social engineering such as Owenism, or as in the case of Oneida, how a once religious community endured only as a commercial venture. Similarly he shows institutions such as asylums wove their religious inspiration with the science of the times but like prisons and almshouses became holding pens for outcasts rather than places for healing and reform.

Walters also situates the emergence of reform in the particular circumstances of antebellum America. He argues that the emergence of the middle class created made it possible for people to devote time to reform, and that technological advances in printing made it possible for people to actually make a living as an "agitator." He also argues that reform helped shape the identity of the emerging middle class. This point come through particularly clearly in his chapter on working man's reform.

Walters' synthesis suffers from its grand scope and short length. In it he sacrifices a certain amount of detail and analysis for space and clarity. The section on utopian movements, for example, traces the personalities of the major reformers and a brief outline of the community that followed without in-depth analysis. Throughout the book quotations from primary sources would have been helpful in giving a feel for the particular movement under discussion. The lack of primary source material allows Walters to sacrifice documentation, and the reader sometimes wishes for some assistance in discerning the origin or fuller development of a particular point. To his credit, Walters provides a good bibliographical essay at the end, but the lack of documentation sometimes proves frustrating and thus interrupts the otherwise smooth flow in the text. Nonetheless, American Reformers is a very readable and useful synthesis of the secondary sources on antebellum reform. As such, it is a helpful and welcome addition to the field.

American Reformers is a wonderful resource book. Walters has done a beautiful job blending information with intersting anecdotes. A great book for anyone interested in reform movements of the 19th century, and how they infuence contemporary society.

Today, despite the progress that has been made since the Civil Rights Act, systemic, and often unconscious discrimination persists against African Americans. Why is this the case? I believe Walters and Smith would argue that presently Americans are lack the ability to analyze society in political, economic, and structural terms. The result is that we, as a society, and African Americans, as a minority, are blind to the very obstacles that must be overcome. The value of "African American Leadership" lies in its ability to situate the discussion of African American leadership in the midst of a social, political, and historical exegesis. The weakness of the book rest with its deficiency in theoretical and methodological approaches, as well as its lack of attention to how other societal inequalities besides race (socioeconomic stratification, for instance) should be part of the discussion. Walters and Smith, take on the challenge of educating their audience about the social and historical forces that influence "Negro" and later "Black" leaders' effectiveness throughout history and even today. Towards this end, I feel "African American Leadership" has met the challenge. The contemporary pioneers of the movement towards social equity must build on and learn from Walters' and Smith's discussion.

Befroe the time of tabiod news, there was a man who felt that journalism should be taught in college so that the people who entered the field knew what they were doing. From that beginning at the University of Missouri, many other colleges have gone on to teach journalism. But it took the work of one man who believed that journalism was a respeceted profession to make the rest of the world to believe that too. A fascinating read about Walter Williams and how the School of Journalism came to be at one university and changed the way journalist were thought of.

Ever hear of 'last name' reference books?
(as in: "Got a problem? Look it up in (author's last name)!")

This is one of those books--- broad coverage of a lot of important topics regarding Spotlight SAR...

I really enjoyed this book. He goes through some pretty basic things and then goes from there to being able to use these techniques to complete a painting. I like how he introduced color and explained each one on transparency etc. The demos are explained very well, then he goes on to show other ways to use similar techniques. Lots of good photos for reference. It is a fun and very worthwhile book for the beginner and intermediate watercolor painter. I would buy it again!

This is a simple minded book for those who see things only in blue and grey. The basic thesis is that the North wasn't completely opposed to slavery (there were 236 slaves in NJ, after all); so therefore the south must have been right. Go figure.
Don't waste a minute on this thoughtless propaganda. It's not only politically incorrect (as the author proudly points out), it's just incorrect.

Being from Boston, MA, I have developed a viewpoint on this topic that most people would not expect. My education about the issues of this war were naturally quite biased towards the North. I can still remember my teachers becoming quite animated in their denunciation of every point of view presented to explain the Southern position, an attitude that had won me over as well. Unfortunately, later in life, this emotion about the sanctity of the Northern cause also caused me to earn a failing grade on what I considered a rather balanced paper. This anecdote clearly demonstrated, to me at least, that there is indeed a serious Northern bias in the teaching of our history, one which downplays, if not omits, pertinent information unflattering to the North. Anyone who denies that the victors write the official history clearly does not understand human nature. The book by the Kennedy brothers challenges these traditional outlooks rather effectively, but unfortunately very affectively also. The constitutional arguments and alternative images of the Northern motivation for the war make fine, compelling points. However, these arguments would bear more weight if the language were less biased and romanticized. That said, this same language is refreshing in its bias. The same people who complain about it use the exact same tactics when speaking of the North. Still, this book would be better received if it at least appeared more objective and dispassionate. I offer that we Northerners often forget that our section of the nation was part of the cycle of slavery. Yankee traders had brought the slaves to the South earlier on, and more importantly, their role in the cycle was to use the cotton in their manufacturing. They sold the slave to his master, bought the product of the slave and sold it to the world for an enormous profit! Is this fact presented pominently in our Civil War education? I would like to sign my name to this review, but quite frankly, it would not be wise. These viewpoints could earn me some enmity. I do not romanticize the Old South, but I do not endorse the "party line" either. True objectivity is not really appreciated or well tolerated in our society today.

I have read many books on this subject, and there have been many that I liked. There have also been many which have been utterly untrue or the author will hold back some of what he feels because he is afraid he might offend someone. Mr. Kennedy held back nothing. That is good The truth is the truth no matter who likes it and who doesn't. I am a patriotic Southerer and I, like many of the Southern people, am tired of hearing people tell half of the truth about the way things are. Mr. kennedy does a good job of explaining how most of the Southern people were for ending slavery and that it would have ended soon without the interference of a tyrant. He also points out to many bleeding heart liberals that the United States real interest wasn't in freeing the slaves as has been taught falsely to our children until now very few people in the South really know what the war was really about. If every true Southerner would read this book, and they should, I believe some emotions would be stirred up. PLEASE, if you love the South, as I do, read this book

I'm being generous by giving one star. It's a very concise explanation of the motives behind abolitionism after 1830, however, most people would probably rather gouge out their eyes with a spoon or undergo open heart surgery without anesthesia before reading past the first chapter. Much primary material is used, however, an all encompassing thesis is never given. Moreover, Walthers doesn't ever give a history of events that influenced abolitionism such as the Compromise of 1850, the Kansas-Nebraska Act, or the Dred Scott decision. This book is a waste of trees. I reccomend using it for kindling or smoke signals.