An excellent cautionary tale about sleaze, error, and blind faith. The Bre-X fiasco was perpetrated on people who should have known better, but it also hurt a lot of ordinary Joes. Ironically, Calgary, Toronto and on Wall St are the real villans here, not Indonesia. Even the Suharto family, famed for its corruption, can't keep up with the greed of Western mining promoters, elite underwriters, and savvy investors.

Many people were ruined when Bre-X shot up 10,000 percent, and then tanked in a couple of hours. No one ever seems to learn, not after Keating, BCCI, Drexel Burnham, and Maxwell. Only those of us too poor to be in the stock market ever seem to see this coming. We can only ask ourselves "who's next?" in macabre anticipation.

This book should not be read by those who only have a low-level interest in information warfare, and more specifically, information in warfare. This is an academic document for policy makers and the defense establishment, as commissioned by the Air Force. The focus is on the information-based processes and weapons and their interaction. I found valuable concepts and ideas throughout the book, especially in one of last chapters about lessons the DOD can learn from business. For those in defense with a need to discover the wide aspects of IIW, this is for you. But only if you are in a mid- to high-level position or thirst for knowledge of greater concepts.

One thing I have always found interesting about books was reading one that was based upon real life events. That is why I was happy when I found the book "When They Burned the White House," by Andrew Tully. I thought it would be great to read a novelization about the last days of the War of 1812, to see how the American author treated the British characters. Would they be vilans? Would the Americans be treated at the ultimate heroes defending thier home? And how would the general quality of it be? I can tell you I was surprised and impressed with this book, as it was accutate and well written. At parts it gets a little tedious as I start to wonder if andybody really cares about the route that Dolley Madison took and the people she talked to on her way back the the burnt capitol, but the author stil made it seem interesting. If you want to know 1st hand historty about the Burning of Washington in 1814, or if you like any historical fiction, you should read this book.

This is one of the best books I have read to do with yoga. Jenny Beeken is a wonderful teacher and the book is very easy to read.

If you have never had anything to do with Yoga before than this is the book to start you off. I love Yoga now and I contribute some of my love to what I was taught when I read this book.

Practice what she teaches and you will become a new person

Let me preface this review by saying I have read most of the Blackie Ryan series and have loved them all, despite a few irritations. Let me also disclose that I am a moderate Republican and practicing Roman Catholic. If that shoots my credibility in the foot for you, move on to the next review.

I found the story line in Bishop in the West Wing to be very thin. The central problem of the poltergeists in the White House is brought up from time to time to string it all together, but it seems an afterthought. The true purpose of this novel seems to be to recount Father Greeley's visits to the White House during the Clinton administration, with Blackie playing the part of Greeley and President McGurn as President Clinton. While I would be interested in reading about that subject, I would prefer it in a nonfiction text, as opposed to under the guide of fiction. Having Republicans as a group stereotyped as hate-spewing elists, as they are in this book, is no more fair than stereotyping all Catholic priests as pedophiles, which they are most certainly not. Also, there is a real Rasputin-ish quality to the part that Blackie plays in the White House in this novel. Am I the only one who noticed this?

I was bothered by Father Greeley's characterizations of teenage girls in this novel, as I have been in his past novels. It seems especially evident in Bishop in the West Wing. He portrays them as modern-day "Valley Girls", with ditzy personalities and brainless slang used in every sentence. When one conducts a conversation with most teenage girls and young women, I believe one will find that most of them, especially those of the type Father Greeley is representing in his novels, speak much like the rest of us. I won't even get started on the "ebonics" he imposed on a high-level African-American White House aide in the book.

I am hoping that this novel is an abberation in the Blackie Ryan series, and not a sign of things to come in future novels. Despite the negative tone of this review, I would still nonetheless recommend this novel to Blackie fans such as myself (hence the two stars instead of one). Blackie is a fun, clever character, and spending some time in his world is always an escape from our own. Just hold your nose in parts and pray that Father Greeley will juice things up in the next Blackie novel.

Andrew Greeley's newest well-paced mystery will capture the reader's interest, as Blackie Ryan visits the White House to investigate a possible poltergeist. He's invited by President Jack McGrath, a Chicagoan of Irish descent, a widower whose enemies have tried to paint him as a womanizer. (See a previous reviewer's characterization of a possible "Clinton done right". I also wondered if that were Greeley's intent.)

McGrath is innocent of these allegations, as he is numb, locked into celibacy by grief over his wife's untimely death in a plane crash while campaigning. His two lively adolescent daughters connive to interest him in a brainy, attractive aide, but he hasn't the heart to pursue.

Greeley's usual blend of suspense, nuanced characterization, humor, and insight into the Irish and the church, provides the reader with another enjoyable tale. Recommended.

United States President John Patrick McGurn has enough to deal with between the eastern established media and the Republicans. However, the Irish-American from Chicago, dubbed rancorously by the press as "Machine Gun Jack" and want to tie him with the Irish Mafia, has a poltergeist wrecking havoc in his new home, The White House. Jack asks long time friend and successful amateur sleuth Father Blackie Ryan to exorcise the spirit by discovering who is really behind the shake, rattle, and roll in the Oval Office, West Wing, and Lincoln Room, etc.

Unable to mount more than a weak argument to remain in the Windy city, Blackie travels to Washington DC upon the orders of his superior Cardinal Cronin. Blackie quickly concludes that the ghost is more likely a young female suffering from unrequited love or vengeance against a President detested by his enemies as he begins eliminating the candidates one at a time.

THE BISHOP IN THE WEST WING is the best Blackie Ryan novel in several years as Andrew M. Greeley provides insight into the White House from a guest's perspective while satirizing the seemingly endless attacks on Bill Clinton, obviously Jack's model. The story line is fun for everyone except right wing Republicans and the so-called liberal "muckraking" press as Blackie looks for a more mundane solution to the poltergeist question. Father Greeley makes no bones about his feelings towards the previous president with an engaging amateur sleuth tale that Mr. Clinton and many other fans will enjoy.

Harriet Klausner

While Hacker uses statistics to illustrate the divide between black and white America, his book is anything but dry. Furthermore, while Hacker is an academic, he avoids the text book type of writing that many academics are known for. Two Nations is interesting, provocative and should be required reading in any class that attempts to address the problems of race in America. Although Hacker's book doesn't provide any solutions, he doesn't proport to. He is truly the foremost writer on race in America. Read Two Nations and find out why.

I'm amazed at some of my fellow reviewers. Hacker pickes on whites? Sucks up to blacks? Hardly.

I read the book some years ago and was very impressed. Hacker's use of statistics cuts through a lot of the rhetoric that surround the issue of race in America. I don't agree with all his conclusions--on the topic of race, none of us agree on every point--but he makes some very good points. My only complaint, actually, is the analysis is a bit light. I would have liked to see him draw some more conclusions. Still, if you want a statistical overview of race, linked with some good commentary, here's a place to start.

Oh, and I suppose I should mention I'm a white guy. Not a self-hating white guy, just a white guy. And I didn't and don't feel picked on by Hacker's book.

What can be said about one of the most noteworthy works of the late twentieth century! Hacker's "revelations", although surprising to some, are familiar to the millions of minority Americans who have felt the stares, the unwanted job placements, the overt and covert acts of discrimination, and the other biases inflicted upon them since the first slave ship landed or the first white man entered "Injun territory." Mr. Hacker's writing style makes the facts contained within the pages easy to grasp and ponder. By including a segment on the differing racial reactions to the O.J. Simpson trial, Hacker has tapped into a serious flaw in America's mettle: how the justice system is definitely NOT colorbind! The book should be mandatory for high schools, colleges, workplaces, police departments, and even future and present residents of the White House!

Though it's not the worst book I've ever read, I had the hardest time getting past the third chapter. With promises that this book was interesting I was quite disappointed. The book reads like you are reading a geneology chart instead of a book of scandals. It throws in a name, and then EVERY person they are related to, who they are related to and so on. The story is interesting...if you can get past all the [crud]. If you're looking for an interesting book with history you've come to the wrong place. If you are looking for a history book with a few interesting high spots...you'll love it.

I was required to read this book for a history class in college this semester. I am usually not a big fan of history, it's not my specialty, but this book kept me interested and hooked to the story. It reads rather quickly and is very enjoyable. It is not boring as I find many accounts of history. I do not know what other books are out there about the Margaret Eaton controversy, but I think this one is tops. I definately recommend it.

This book is well-written and difficult to put down. The author did his research well. It is a good explanation of the Margaret Eaton Affair and of the social mores that women were expected to live by in the 1820s and 1830s. It is also a classic example of the theory that "men get their identity by what they do; women, by their family." Margaret Eaton could not escape that she was the daughter of a "tavern-keeper" and many of the slanders against her were merely based on the prejudices of the time concerning the stereotypical behavior of the daughters of tavern-keepers.

This is an important and well-researched study of the image of African Americans as presented in the media (mostly TV and Movies). Indeed, it is a "must read" for anyone interested in white attitudes regarding African Americans. The authors begin with a nice review the dominant survey research approach to gauging change in racial attitudes. They also discuss their own survey and qualitative study of Whites living in the Indianapolis metro area. The findings of the in-depth qualitative interviews are particularly interesting and valuable for folks interested in the validity of survey research on racial attitudes.

Rightly reserving the use of the counterproductive term "racist" for those who feel Blacks are a "lower order of humanity," the authors develop a framework for categorizing White American views of the African American population from "low denial" (enlightened) to "high denial" (overtly racist) (chapter 2).

In their view, most whites fall between these poles--termed by the authors as "ambivalent" (a mix of positive and negative views about Blacks.)

Unapologetically integrationist (assimilationist?) in their views, the authors see "low denial" whites as those folks who view African Americans sympathetically and empathetically, (as brothers/sisters), who share fundamental interests, but who suffer unique barriers to equal opportunity.

What seems to differentiate the "low-denial" whites from their well-meaning but "ambivalent" peers is that low-denial whites uncritically accept the victimization explanation for the social problems of the Black community.

This is where the trouble begins...

According to the authors, enlightened Whites see the Black community as largely helpless in the face of White dominated society. Hence, for example, high rates of crime and non-marital births stem from forces external to the Black community. These "enlightened" Whites appear to believe that if anti-Black stereotypes and discrimination were to end, the social problems experienced by African Americans would be resolved.

On the other hand, the mass of "ambivalent" whites is less likely to let struggling Black folks off the hook. They tend to see each person as a moral agent with the freedom to make choices even in the face of discrimination and inequality. They also feel that the stereotypes of Black folks have a grain of truth to them--e.g., that blacks do tend to be, say, less educated, more violent, more likely to bear children out of wedlock than Whites or Asians, as evidenced by empirical evidence reported in the media. These folks wonder (rightly in my opinion) whether current discrimination is really so powerful and dehumanizing as to engender the social problems of the black community.

The weakness of this morally laden framework is that it perceives folks who have honest questions about the role of individual choice and moral responsibility (i.e., character) in shaping life chances as somehow unenlightened ("in denial"). With the huge social problems associated with the Black community, I think it is fair to say that "ambivalent" attitudes towards blacks are justified. Indeed, survey evidence suggests that African Americans also share ambivalent attitudes towards their own racial group. (Even Jesse Jackson has made public his personal ambivalence towards young black men, admitting that he often has felt relieved to discover that the stranger walking towards him on a darkened street is not Black.)

If the majority of African Americans also recognize that endemic social problems exist within poor black communities, does that mean that they too are "in denial?"

Later in the book the authors go on to encourage the media to construct positive images that encourage "racial comity." They frame this as an ethical and political responsibility. But because the authors emphasize IMAGE over REALITY, the book often takes on an Orwellian tone. In my opinion, if the media seeks honest portrayals of African Americans, it will often reflect the reality of difference.

The authors seem to assume assimilation as a valued goal by finding flaw with any racial differentiation in fictional portrayals in movies and television. While multiculturalism celebrates group differences, the authors find problematic any racial differentiation whatsoever. This is a flawed perspective. African Americans are have a distinct history and culture and are not simply white folks in dark face. I suspect the authors would erase expression of these existential differences from the media if given the chance.

So while the book is a valuable contribution (as discussed by the previous reviewer), it suffers from a naively self-righteous and assimilationist perspective.

This is a very important book of research. Though written in sociologist language (lots of statistics and repetitition claims), this is one work that provides meticulous reserach about how the media help perpetuate racial stereotypes and prototypes in this society.

As a teacher who is studying widely literature about the media, I found Entman and Rojecki's work useful for providing a lens to better analyze media representations of Black and White people. The authors contend that "Blacks now occupy a kind of limbo status in White America's thinking, neither fully accepted nor wholly rejected by the dominant culture. The ambiguity of Blacks' situation gives particular relevance and perhaps potency to the images of African Americans in the media."

They show that though representations of Black people are quantitatively better than in the past, these representations still convey stereotypical or ambiguous images of Blacks. For example, though there has been sharp increase of Black male actors in movies, their roles still revolve around plots that focus on sports, crime, and violence. In the area of news media, Blacks are usually presented as sources of disruption, as victims, and as complaining supplicants. These type of images, they contend, help to maintain a gap in what they refer to as comity on the part of Whites toward Blacks and other racial minorities in this country.

They provide a well known but much needed reiteration of why the media maintains these stereotypes and marginalizations of racial minorities: largely it's eoncomics."Media workers," they argue, "seek to make money for their organizations and advance their own careers. That means that they must stay vigilantly attuned to the presumed tastes of their target audiences. These creators operate in a professional culture and organizationl milieu that transmits lessons about what attracts and sells, what upsets and repels. Ratings and market research increasingly inform decisions, whether about news coverage or entertainment plots." They argue that political and White ethnocentricism play an equal role as well

Though critics may disagree with some of the authors'analysis and conclusions, this book deserves wide reading in media studies, communications, ethnic studies, and sociology courses. It should be read as a useful resource by concerned teachers and media activists.

Tempted by super-vamipres, when I got around to running an Elysium game it was a total disaster. I would suggest this book only to those serious roleplayers who can create monstrously powerful characters and not get into a single barfight with them. You really need to know your stuff to make this one work!

Elysium describes the society of Elder Kindred, with all their philosophy, their intrigues, their squabbles and their struggles for power. It contains new backgrounds, merits&flaws and Gehenna cults. It is well written and provides details about daily life in a Camarilla city (though everything happens behind closed doors). The book claims that every Elder behaves like that, what I guess can't be true. Like in mortal society most people don't want the trouble a leadership brings. And after centuries of "Salon"-affairs Elders could get bored by kindred politics as well. Unlike Sigmund Freud mentioned, not every son wants to kill his father, likewise not every childe wants the final death of her sire. Apart from that, Elysium offers many good facts about vampire high society.

But again, there is absolutely no conjunction between age and generation! On the first pages Elysium even claims that older vampires have a younger appearance, what sounds completely nonsense.

Ever wanted to play a Vampires campaign at a "slightly higher" level of power? Or are you just a power gamer? Either way, you'll love this book. It's got rule for creating Vampire characters that are hundreds of years old, and that have all the power that conveys (and all of the problems too. There's nothing like having your arch-enemy be in control of military forces equal to a small country. Oh well, such is the price of power). It's also very useful for GM's creating mentors, Princes, sires, or anyone else that's just damn powerful

This is one of those books that after you've read it, you can't tell if it was worth your time or not.

I learned a bit about the Papal election process, and I learned a LOT about what a particular part of the priesthood thinks about the current and previous Popes. That was interesting to me as a "small town Catholic boy".

However, as other reviewers have noted, the characterization is paper thin, the plotting is silly, the "bad guys" in the Roman curia are mainly faceless and without redemption, and the "good guys" are completely without fault. I'd go further to add that the bias shown by the supposedly objective reporters in the novel is so severe that the characters cease to be believable in their own right, and become "mouthpieces" for the author.

Now, for fans of Greeley, I'm sure this will be a satisfying read... For those neutral to his particular style, (and it can get really thick, particularly the dialogue) I suspect it might not be. Before I picked up "White Smoke", the last time I read a Greeley novel was over 12 years ago. I liked that book. I don't much care for this one.

This is the first Greeley novel I have read, though they have all come recommended. As a storyteller he is definitely up there with the best romance writers--in fact I would argue he is better than most sappy romance authors. However, it did take me a good 40-50 pages to understand his jumping from one first-person narrative to the next depending on which character was telling the story, and why he was writing this way. Not a writing style that is widely used.

This book is also a suspenseful mystery, though not as well written in this regard as the romantic. What Greeley does best is give you a good lesson in history, politics and present day sociological makeup up the present-day Catholic Church. Warts and all.

Many conservitive Catholics would probably find this book offensive, though most persons and groups are fictitious (except for Opus Dei, the conservitive Catholic organization). I believe most active Catholics feel that any institution needs to be scrutinized and critiqued. All organizations are run by humans and all humans are fallible. Including the Pope and especially his bishops and cardinals.

Bottom line for this book--it's a decent read, though readers unfamiliar with Greeley's style should be cautious, because it can seem like it is jumping around. It is not the best of mysteries, nor romances, nor even lessons on the Catholic religion--but it could be worse. It is only a point-of-view and not the only one in this universal church. It is a view of what "could" happen and may be close to what might happen during the next conclave. It's entertaining enough as a relaxing summer read, or a quick read on a long plane trip. Though don't ask it to be anything else.

Politics, Vatican style, have much in common with Watergate when Bishop "Blackie" Ryan and Sean Cardinal Cronin travel to Rome to participate in the election of a new Pope. Intrigue, romance, and a look at the behind the scenes activities of the Roman Catholic hierarchy make this a fast paced read, one that you will have difficulty putting aside. This is a must read for all Andrew Greeley fans.