Very good look into the life of one of golfings great professionals, man or woman. The book gives very good technical swing deescriptions and photographs along with an enjoyable to read story of Mickey Wright and her life on the tour.

Can the federal government effectively target funds to needier communities? Does political support exist at the federal level to achieve redistribution in the allocation of intergovernmental aid? The purpose of book is to answer these questions through a case study of the Urban Development Action Grant Program (UDAG). The authors contend that "...effective targeting and redistribution of resources undermine political support for the policies and programs that accomplish them (p. 2)." Their thesis is that "...large redistributive programs such as UDAG automatically generate political opposition powerful enough to transform them into distributive programs or lead to their demise. This study of UDAG is a good example of what happens to federal programs that seem to work. The authors' argue that the very success of UDAG in targeting economic development funds to stimulate private investment in distressed cities may be the reason for its demise in the late 1980s. UDAG was a difficult program to create in 1977 because its redistributive purposes meant that achieving the necessary political support in Congress would be tricky. It ran counter to the pork-barrel politics and logrolling style of Congress in which bills try to have something for everyone or a quid pro quo on a future bill. The Carter administration was able to push the bill through Congress but its later demise would be due to weak political support. Distributive bills have a far better chance of passing the Congress than one that would reauthorize a program that redistributive federal monies to selected, needier communities. This case study of UDAG effectively addresses issues posed above. In Chapter 3 the authors present a careful and thorough account of the political history of UDAG, showing the linkages and differences between this urban program and others that preceded it. They carefully demonstrate that after authorization, the program had to undergo further definition by HUD in order to be implemented; in addition, amendments to the program were eneacted by Congress in 1979 to better target funds to "pockets of poverty." But, the evolution of UDAG throughout the late 1970s and early 1980s was one of political and programmatic changes to refocus, make less-targeted, make less redistributive, and make more universalistic the direction of the program. The end result was to produce a program in the Reagan years that had little political support, declining appropriations, and weak linkages to its original purpose. This assessment of the authors is supported by a series of GAO reports on UDAG and an internal HUD evaluation of UDAG in 1982. The book does a good job of summarizing the crux of the issues raised by these reports. The general conclusion is that politics makes it very difficult to effectively target programs to distressed communities. Members of Congress, particularly those whose districts do not benefit from a redistributive program, seek to expand the boundaries of programs like UDAG in order to receive a greater slice of the federal budget pie. But the broadening of programs without massive new funding produces insufficient funds directed to urban problems. The end result is that federal dollars are spent with only modest impact on the intended objective, which is relieving economic distress in the neediest communities. Who benefitted from UDAG? In Chapter 5 the authors present the heart of their empirical analysis of the program, comparing so-called Rustbelt and non-Rustbelt cities that received UDAG funding. Their analysis is descriptive and understandable, presenting an effective test of their thesis. The conclusion of the analysis is that UDAG was essentially a redistributive program throughout its lifetime. Because of its targeting, it did not provide equal shares of funding to all regions and states, thereby undermining political support for the program. Only the small cities portion of the program followed a distributive pattern, offering somewhat more non-targeted aid to non-Rustbelt communities. The demise of UDAG is consistent with the books premise that giving three-fourths of the money to large cities in a basically redistributive pattern killed political support for reauthorization. Of course the bashing that the program took from the Reagan administration and its abuse by HUD also contributed to its demise. The authors raise an issue in their presentation suggesting that the UDAG experience reflects a "structural limit" in our political system (p. 10). They seem to believe that redistributive programs may be doomed to failure in this country because of the policy-making process. I don't buy this premise. Many redistributive programs have been successful and have survived politically. More likely, UDAG is just another in a long line of programs that were created to serve targeted needs but were broadened over time by the Congress. This country has a history of universalism in the reauthorization of programs--be they urban or rural, rustbelt or sunbelt, Democratic or Republican initiatives. The interesting finding of this study is that UDAG survived for as long as it did as a more-or-less redistributive program targeted to needier cities in needier regions of the country. In some ways it may be better for urban areas to fight for targeted programs--even if they will only survive about a decade. Ten years of targeting to distressed cities may be far better than 20 or 30 years of universalistic distribution of federal urban funds.

This book contains general, basic information on laborador retrievers. It leans more toward show labs than the working/field dog and lacks specific details. There are other books published that cover the same information, and so much more. For those interested in field trials and working dogs as opposed to show-labs, I recommend "The Working Retrievers" by Tom Quinn.

If your getting start in showing labradors, then you must read this book. The author gives you his experience on what a lab should look like in the show ring. Take heed - he definitely goes back to basics.

Characteristics and Temperament The main characteristics of Labradors are their coat, tail, head and temperament. They have a double coat: a soft, downy undercoat that keeps them dry and warm in cold water and a hard outer coat that helps them repel water. Their tail, described best as an otter tail, is thick at the base and tapers to a narrower point. It should not be carried over the back nor should it have a curl to it. It should, however, be at exactly coffee table height and always be ready to swipe one clean. Their head is clean cut and somewhat broad, with hanging ears. Their expression is alert and intelligent and conveys a kind, friendly temperament.

Their best feature is their temperament. Labs are loving, people oriented dogs. They are happiest when they are with you. Labs are retrievers and will bring you things they find laying about your house or yard. They tend to be quite patient with children and wonderful family dogs. They are not guard dogs. They may bark protectively, but will generally not act more aggressively. Labs are wonderful people dogs, more likely to lick someone to death than hurt them. They tend to be stable, not easily upset by strange things or occurrences. They will take many things in stride.

In the U.S., there are two distinct "lines" of Labradors: field lines and show lines. Field line Labradors have been bred with an emphasis on field or hunting ability, and show line Labradors have been bred with an emphasis on conformation and temperament. There is some dissension between the two groups, with field people claiming that show lines have lost much of their hunting and retrieving abilities, and show people claiming that field lines do not much look like Labradors any more and lack correct temperament. The truth is likely somewhere in between. Dogs from field lines will generally have a lot of drive, and will often exhibit more energy. Dogs from show lines might not be as fast, but most are capable hunters, though not necessarily field trial material. Either type can make a pleasant companion for a day out of doors.

Labrador Retrievers are people- and action- oriented dogs, and can become bored if left to their own devices. Untrained, they can be unmanageable due to their size and enthusiasm. Unexercised, they will often turn to destruction or escape to alleviate boredom and excess energy. They require attention and love as much as food and water. Labradors are easy to train which makes obedience work a fun way to interact with your dog. Labradors also require plenty of exercise -- this is especially true since most Labs love to eat! Ensuring they get proper exercise, training, and attention will give you a happy, healthy Labrador.

Here's yet another Sherlockian pastiche off the presses. I buy 'em all, hoping to come across another Sam Siciliano's Angel of the Opera or another Laurie R. King's The Beekeeper's Apprentice. Or at least a Jan Walker's Singular Case of the Duplicate Holmes, but my advice for you who've arrived to this page and are considering buying this book is "Keep on going. Nothing to see here."

As Holmes pastiches go, this particular book isn't too bad. But neither is it very gripping. It's just sort of...there. Out of the dozen or so installments that I've read in the continuing non-Doyle adventures of the Great Detective, this little outing does little to distinguish itself.

We get no real insight into the Holmesian character, and certainly none into the often-overlooked Watson. (In truth, a lot of the recent pastiches use this duo only as an excuse to introduce other historical or fictional characters that the author is far more interested in investigating.) The antagonists are singularly bland, and the supporting cast is not altogether memorable.

The key cryptographic puzzle is rather intricate, though, so much so that several diagrams are required in order for the reader to make any sense of the whole thing. It's fairly clever.

However, the denouement is just ludicrous and the fulfillment of Holmes' plan requires that everyone involved should unwittingly act out their part by undertaking the most irrational actions. The whole climax feels forced.

My biggest complaint? The villains are threatening Holmes' client from the moment he sets foot in England and wish to prevent him from going to a certain place, when, in fact, they have no evidence that he ever intends to go there, nor that anything he might do would in the slightest way be disadvantageous to them. In fact, as it all turns out, the bad guys have no way of solving a riddle without his assistance in the first place, so they would've been better advised to have duped him into acting on their behalf. But perhaps I quibble.

In any case, it's a quick read for those who absolutely must have a Holmes fix, and the notes at the end of the book are not without interest.

Right up until the end, this is one of the best Holmes pastiches I have read in years. Holmes and Watson are depicted pretty much bang on, there is plenty of authentic local 1895 color in various British Isle locales, and there are some interesting characters for Holmes and Watson to interact with, plus an ancient, secret message for Holmes to decode.

But at the end, things fall apart. First, Holmes' preposterous plan for dealing with the three villains would, in real life, have led to a mass grave covering the bodies of Holmes, Watson, their client, his son, and a number of Baker Street Irregulars! Second, the nature of the "Devil's Grail" itself is a huge, huge letdown. But right up to these final pages, things move along well, and the entertainment value of the proceedings is unquestionable.

I do have one other reservation about the novel, but it is a reservation I have about fully half of the hundred or so novel-length Holmes pastiches I have read over the years. Namely, the villains act exactly contrary to their revealed motivations. They want to find the secret hidden in the ruins of Glastonbury, but they spend half the novel preventing the one man who can find the secret for them from going there! All they have to do is wait until Col. Harden takes his photos, then steal them. But instead they are involved in a hundred pages of nonsensical foolishness to PREVENT Harden from getting the info they need. Then, with Holmes on the case, all they need to do is to wait until Holmes finds the Grail and take it, but insead they interfere constantly for another 70 pages. Of course, the answer to the paradox is that the author could not fill his pages with action unless the villains behaved this way! But I wish more authors would try to find another way to keep the reader's attention besides having the villains act like the Coyote in the Roadrunner cartoons throughout the book.

(This review refers to the second edition.) The Great Psychologists is just what the title makes it out to be. The book is an account of the evolution of psychology by examining eminent figures in the times leading up to the development psychology and the men who later devoted themselves to scientific work in the subject. Each chapter examines an individual, a well explained overview of his thinkings, and the cultural and historical contexts in which he worked. The biographies of each person are detailed and seem to be included more for history than science. One gets a definite sense of how psychology came to be. A good background in the subject would be of benefit. This edition is copyrighted in the late 1960s and thus does not go beyond this point in time. It is an old graduate level textbook from when my father was receiving his doctorate. The last chapter very much dates the book. The wording at times can be verbose, and the book itself is very long. The last two chapters seem to lose the reader's interest as the last one especially is a long list of names and fields of study. More current editions of this book would probably be of much more value.

(This review refers to teh second edition.) The Great Psychologists is just what the title makes it out to be. The book is an account of the evolution of psychology by examining eminent figures in the times leading up to the development psychology and the men who later devoted themselves to scientific work in the subject. Each chapter examines an individual, a well explained overview of his thinkings, and the cultural and historical contexts in which he worked. The biographies of each person are detailed and seem to be included more for history than science. One gets a definite sense of how psychology came to be. A good background in the subject would be of benefit. This edition is copyrighted in the late 1960s and thus does not go beyond this point in time. It is an old graduate level textbook from when my father was receiving his doctorate. The last chapter very much dates the book. The wording at times can be verbose, and the book itself is very long. The last two chapters seem to lose the reader's interest as the last one especially is a long list of names and fields of study. More current editions of this book would probably be of much more value.

The biographies in this work were useful and informative.

'Point Man' writes from experience. Although this is 'fiction', he has 'been there, done that' and knows what he's talking about. Might be a little confusing, but so is combat, esp. close quarters combat! There are many authors who claim to write 'true' books, but how many do you know who write 'fiction' that's from REAL EXPERIENCE? Good reading...ENJOY! Also, check out his Non-Fiction books! "Point Man" & "Walking Point" to read the true stories!

I read all three books and they are out of sinc, book one should be book 2 or maybe 3 it is hard to tell in any case they are really hard to read in any kind of order, the main seal is to hard to believe and it really borders on bordom and same thing over and over.

I've read quite a few spec ops books; fiction, historical, good, bad...and this book falls in the "eh" catageroy. It was mildly entertaining, the characters were mildly believable, and the story was predictable at best. Thankfully, the monotany of the pedestrian plot was boken up by action sequences and jungle tracking/stalking scenes. But even those were defeated by the fact that you *knew* that they would always make it out safe or find their man. if you have nothing better to do pick up this book. You might like it you might not. enjoy.