I must admit I enjoy reading contrarian points of view. In the last two fictional books I liked, State of Fear and The Da Vinci Code, the authors questioning of doctrine, global warming and religious respectively, contributed greatly to the novelty of the story. So when perusing the shelf of Lincoln bios at B&N, the title and reviews on the flap ("A devastating critique of Amercia's most famous president") of this book jumped out at me as something that could be a tad entertaining as well as educational. The jury is still be out on the educational value, but from a shock perspective it was certainly entertaining.

Chapters paint the picture of Lincoln as an outright dictator. During his presidency he suspended habeas corpus and used it for things like imprisoning priests who didn't say a presidential prayer during services. If a news article questioned his policies, he'd often imprison the journalist or editor responsible and in some cases had the newspaper's offices ransacked. He had free reign to review any telegraph. There was even an instance where he actually had an opposing politician deported.

Lincoln, according to the author who cited numerous letters and speeches of Lincoln himself, was a white supremacist. Prior to the Emancipation Proclamation, Lincoln often stated that he had no constitutional right, nor an interest, in abolishing slavery. The author also cites Lincoln's graphic orders to literally slaughter any Native Americans that didn't leave land that was to be used for railroad building as evidence of his not believing all men were created equal.

No book on Lincoln would be complete without discussing the Civil War and not surprisingly, Lincoln wasn't portrayed heroically. The ordering of, or at minimum tolerating, the raping, looting, and torching of whole cities whose only inhabitants were women and children should be considered war crimes. The book also documents how dozens of other countries peacefully ended slavery, and if Lincoln was truly a great president and interested in such, the U.S. certainly could've done so as well.

Lincoln's political views of a strong central government were more in line with the British Empire-like system our founding fathers "succeeded" from, than the state sovereign views of those founding fathers. Protectionist tariffs (that hurt free trade), government subsidized improvements (which led to inefficiencies and corruption), a centralized bank, and federal income tax were all things that pretty much took root during Lincoln's reign and changed the face of American politics to this day. For better or worse could be debated. But what's not debatable is that Lincoln's vision of government was in stark contrast to that of Washington's and Jefferson's (who incidentally, had descendants killed fighting for the South during the war).

The book was a very quick read and very interesting. I only gave it 3 stars, however, because most stories have two sides and any American 4th grader has a cursory awareness that there's a heroic side of Lincoln. He's one of four presidents whose mugs are carved into stone on Mount Rushmore; one of three to have a monument in the nation's capitol; and one of two whose birthdays gives us a day home from school. What about that side of the story? I have no doubt there is some truth to Lorenzo's claims given the abundant footnotes and references. But if you are going to write a book not just questioning, but outright destroying the character of a hero, you need to put a modicum of effort explaining how the heroic reputation came to be.

Typical Crichton. A well-researched, intelligent, fast-paced thriller. The protagonists, who believe that media greatly exaggerates the risks and threats of global warming, race around the world to prevent some extreme environmentalist terrorists from (artificially and technologically) creating some "natural" disasters. Inter-woven in the story line is an abundant amount of evidence supporting the argument that global warming is not nearly the threat some make it out to be...and this information is replete with footnotes to validate credible sources and a lengthy bibliography. There are numerous debates between characters in the novel which are enlightening to say the least, and at a higher level the story questions the role of politics vs. faith vs. science.

(click for Amazon)

My whole life I thought sauerkraut was one of the nastiest foods that existed. Then about a year ago I got an urge for a Reuben sandwich. The urge must've been divine intervention, because why would someone so averse to sauerkraut order a Reuben? It was delicious. Now I pile the 'kraut on my hot dogs.

Similarly I couldn't stand onions- especially raw onions. Then at my SuperBowl party when my guacamole was just missing something, it was suggested I up the red onion. That was the trick to an awesome guac'. And now I'm finding raw red onions a great burger topping.

What does sauerkraut and onion have to do with a book review? They are indicative that tastes change. The Twelfth Card was the second disappointing book I've read in the last few months that was by an author whose previous half-dozen or more books I've enjoyed (see my review of Split Second), and perhaps I can give benefit of the doubt to the authors that my taste in books has simply changed.

The Twelfth Card is the fifth or sixth Lincoln Rhyme story by Deaver. Rhyme is a forensic expert and the books are generally well researched and documented detective thrillers that have generally been more interesting due to the detailed descriptions of forensic tools and processes used than the banal bunch of cops running around with guns action. Think about an episode of CSI turned into a 500 page, well-documented novel with a focus on the science, not the action.

In my opinion this novel took a departure from the formula. It was as if Deaver was on deadline, didn't have enough time to worry about researching and documenting science, and just decided to churn out, well, banal cops running around with guns.

What really bothered me was the authors incorrect use of the slang word "benjamin". I listen to enough hip-hop and rap, and watch enough t.v. to assume that a "benjamin" refers to a $100 bill...which has Benjamin Franklin on it. Urban Dictionary confirms that assumption which is also consistent with the SNL guys comically referring to a $10 bill as a Hamilton in the Chronicles of Narnia video. So upon reading this excerpt I cringed:

(page 101) "In his pocket he carried a good-size wad of benjamins, mostly twenties, as well as a horn-handled knife...."

What? I cringed more the second time.

(page 105) "He pulled out a roll of benjamins, peeled off some twenties, held them out to Ralph"

I'm the type of person where some inconsistency in the first five minutes of a movie can ruin a whole movie. This horrible attempt at using slang in dialog bothered me for the remaining 470+ pages in the book...especially since the word was used 10 more times. (I didn't count when reading...I just did a search within a book on Amazon). This from an author I previously liked for his research and detail.

(Perhaps I'm wrong and benjamins can be used simply to represent any currency and not just hundreds. If so, someone correct me and I'll add 1/2 star to this review.)

I strongly recommend Deaver's prior Lincoln Rhyme books but I'd only suggest this if you've read them all and want to keep up with the series. There's a new Lincoln Rhyme book out and I'll probably eventually read that to see if this was just an anomaly.

This was a ho-hum account of how Dell, the company and the individual, got to where they are today, or rather where they were in 1999 when the book was written.

The most exciting parts were in the first few chapters when Michael Dell discusses his entrepreneurial experiences as a child, when he got into computers, and when he started working on them. This continued through college where he was building and repairing computers in his dorm room and ultimately need a warehouse for space - all this behind his parent's backs. To their chagrin, he eventually dropped out of college.

From there the book becomes a very repetitive telling of a story I assume many of us are familiar with. Some of the insight into how he gained efficiencies, reduced lead times, reduced inventories were interesting. I also found Dell's philosophies on hiring practices worth noting.

The problem is that Dell (the writer) paints a very clear picture early on of what is important for Dell (the companY) and then just keeps providing examples going forward. We did this and it cut our inventory down to 6 days. We did that and it cut our inventory down to 5 days. And then we did this and it cut our inventory down to 4 days. Sure, some of the this's and that's were neat...but I was feeling "enough already" about half-way through the book.

To Dell's defense the book may have been more interesting in 1999. Chapters explaining how the Internet will change his business and business in general were particularly dated and a little boring.

If you're a 35 to 45 year-old geek that remembers the first Atari's, Commodore's, and IBM PCs you can read the first few chapters at the Starbucks in the Barnes and Noble so you can ponder, "Damn, why didn't I think of that?" Besides that, unless perhaps you're looking to start some sort of direct-order, manufacturing business, I don't think this is a must-read.

This book's been talked and written about all over the place and with the movie coming out soon I figured I'd give it a spin, and I'm glad I did. Too lazy today to write my own synopsis, I've included Amazon's below.

Besides a quick-paced, interesting plot, I found all the background on religious and art history, as well as the discussions on cryptography and symbolism fascinating. I'll never look at a "^" or "v" again. At times it was challenging figuring out what was true fact and what was exaggerated, but fun regardless.

Amazon.com
With The Da Vinci Code, Dan Brown masterfully concocts an intelligent and lucid thriller that marries the gusto of an international murder mystery with a collection of fascinating esoteria culled from 2,000 years of Western history.

A murder in the silent after-hour halls of the Louvre museum reveals a sinister plot to uncover a secret that has been protected by a clandestine society since the days of Christ. The victim is a high-ranking agent of this ancient society who, in the moments before his death, manages to leave gruesome clues at the scene that only his granddaughter, noted cryptographer Sophie Neveu, and Robert Langdon, a famed symbologist, can untangle. The duo become both suspects and detectives searching for not only Neveu's grandfather's murderer but also the stunning secret of the ages he was charged to protect. Mere steps ahead of the authorities and the deadly competition, the mystery leads Neveu and Langdon on a breathless flight through France, England, and history itself. Brown (Angels and Demons) has created a page-turning thriller that also provides an amazing interpretation of Western history. Brown's hero and heroine embark on a lofty and intriguing exploration of some of Western culture's greatest mysteries--from the nature of the Mona Lisa's smile to the secret of the Holy Grail. Though some will quibble with the veracity of Brown's conjectures, therein lies the fun. The Da Vinci Code is an enthralling read that provides rich food for thought. --Jeremy Pugh

I was strolling the history/biography section of Barnes and Noble when the cover of this book caught my eye. I asked myself, what do I know about these guys? I knew Kennedy was assassinated. I saw a movie once about the Cuban Missile Crisis. Nixon? I knew he was ousted due to Watergate. Besides that, not too much (not to mention I wasn't even sure what Watergate was about). I figured I should read the book.

I'm glad it did. It replaced Roosevelt's Secret War : FDR and WWII Espionage as my favorite history book and it is also perhaps one of the best books I've read period. Christopher Matthews (yes of Hardball fame) does a great job telling an entertaining story about not just these two men, but through their careers, U.S. Politics from the mid-1940's through early 1970's.

Some of the highlights:

Both men became fledgling politicians when elected to Congress in 1946 shortly after each returned home from WWII service. Although of different parties, each had very similar political views and both made names for themselves in their staunch opposition to communism.

In 1953, JFK, at 35 years-old was sworn in as a senator and was assigned room 362 in the Senate Office Building. Nixon, at the same time, was sworn in as the 2nd youngest Vice President (to Eisenhower) and assigned room 361 in the same building. They worked right across the hall from each other for 8 years and were not just friendly, but great mutual admirers of each other. Matthews includes numerous letters written between the two men and between the men and each other's families.

Kennedy was very sick with Addison's Disease, a failure of the adrenal glans that could be fatal. At two points in his political career he was hospitalized and sick to the point where his last rites were read to him. But whenever he appeared publicly on crutches or gaunt (he was down to 140 lbs at one point) it was spun as back problems or malaria from his WWII service. When Kennedy needed to take a leave from Congress, Nixon voluntarily refused to vote any issues so Kennedy's illness wouldn't politically unbalance the vote in the senate.

Their friendship soured during the campaigning for the 1960 elections in which each were running for President. The “Great Debates”, the first debates to be televised to a majority of U.S households, were discussed with great behind the scenes perspective. The suave Kennedy destroyed Nixon in the first one according to the polls, unless you polled those who just listened on radio which gave the nod to Nixon. JFK, who everybody loved, beat the unlikeable Nixon in the election but barely. The popular vote was 34,226,731 to 34,108,157 and the closeness of this vote is what turned the once friends into political enemies.

Background on the Cuban Bay of Pigs crisis is discussed and how JFK screwed up the mission, but more importantly how his wrong-doing was covered up and didn't come to light. Similarly discussed is how JFK was instrumental in the CIA's assassination of South Vietnam's (yes – the side we were on) president Ngo Dinh Diem, and how this act escalated the need for U.S. military presence there. Also discussed is that this was all covered up.

Nixon meanwhile ran for Governor of California in 1962...and lost...and resigned from politics. Ultimately, he was convinced he was still needed and ran for president and won in 1968, largely inheriting the Vietnam war from Kennedy and Johnson. During Nixon's term he held a summit conference in Beijing with cold-warn enemy China, an event even arch-political-rival Ted Kennedy declared “Rarely has the action of any president so captured the imagination and support of the American people.” Nixon was the first U.S. President to visit Moscow resulting in the joint signing of the Strategic Arms Limitation. It was also Nixon that pulled the U.S. out of Vietnam.

Historically Nixon is probably considered one of the least likable presidents ever. But despite his lack of charisma and his being the face of Vietnam, he didn't just win his 1972 bid for re-election. He took 49 out of 50 states, only losing Massachusetts – Kennedy's state. Matthews does a good job showing how Nixon's obsession with all things Kennedy (from Jack to Bobby to Teddy) was his tragic flaw and how this led to Watergate. It was also Ted Kennedy that was primarily responsible for aggressively pushing the Watergate investigations just as Nixon was relentless in keeping the Chappaquiddic incident visible. Also interesting was the fact that the Kennedys were probably guilty of considerably more political espionage and questionable politics than Nixon. The just never got caught.

Of course, in this page or so I can't do justice to the detail behind all the various elections, campaign strategies, the presidencies of Roosevelt, Truman, Ike, the role civil rights and Martin Luther King played, figures like Joe McCarthy and Fidel Castro, the families, and a ton more. But why I thought this book was so great is that it was not just informative, it was also an extremely exciting read...a suspenseful can't-put-down page-turner on par with a great mystery-thriller novel.

In a response to a letter written by 13 year-old Caroline Kennedy thanking Nixon for hosting a private dinner for Jacqueline, Caroline, and John Jr., Nixon wrote “History is the best foundation for almost any profession-- but even more important you will find the really most fascinating reading as you grow older is in history and biography.” I agree.

Typical Grisham. Fast-paced, easy-to-read thriller about a lawyer type trying to run and hide from the bad guys. Much of the story takes place in small towns in Italy with the protagonist studying Italian language and culture as part of his change of identity - so add a star if you're my inlaws. Only complaint was that the ending seemed rushed. I was devouring pages and then questioned "How's this going to end in 30 more pages?"

Click thumbnail for more info at Amazon:

September 11th, 2001 was a wake up call to many, in many ways. Personally, it made me realize I was completely ignorant when it came to current events, politics both domestic and international, as well as history.

While strolling the history and bios section of B&N I figured a book on our first president would be helpful in providing a foundation of American history. What did I know previously about George Washington? I knew he was our first president and he chopped down a cherry tree (which I subsequently learned was just a made-up fable). See...ignorance.

Now I know much more. I picked up this particular book because it looked manageable at about 200 pages and it was. It was brief and light enough to be informative yet not dull as books of this genre can be. The book was fascinating...it always is learning what things were like at different time. I've given it 4 stars because it lacked the page-turning excitement of book like Joseph Persico's Roosevelt's Secret War.