Triumph Reviews

David A. Stockman served as Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) during former President Reagan's first term. President Reagan's platform advocated cutting taxes, eliminating wasteful Government programs, balancing the Federal budget by 1984, and a stronger United States military.

Congressmen, Senators, lobbyists and President Reagan's staff members all had differing priorities. In "The Triumph of Politics: ..." Mr. Stockman discusses an endless stream of strategies and legislative compromises designed to implement President Reagan's platform. Tax cuts are passed, existing programs are cut, and the military is strengthened. But the Federal budget never is balanced because tax increases were forbidden and the compromises placed off-limits many expensive Government programs.

The result is troubling. Former President Carter's proposed 1986 budget would have included an $80 billion deficit (pg. 358). In April 1983 President Reagan's budget "guaranteed $200 billion per year of deficits for the foreseeable future" (pg. 370) that will "consume two-thirds of the nation's net private savings to fund the federal deficit" (pg. 378) and require "$100 billion per year inflow of foreign capital to finance our twin deficits -- trade and the federal budget." (pg. 379). Mr. Stockman believed this huge recurring deficit was not sustainable and that compensating tax increases were not politically acceptable. Mr. Stockman left Government after President Reagan's re-election.

Today we face similar issues. Our trade and Federal deficits continue to grow, a Federal income tax cut was implemented recently, and the United States military is being strengthened. These are similarities -- what is the difference? ***Capitalization.*** In President Reagan's time, economists discussed the possibility of returning to the 'gold standard' (pg. 50) -- tying the dollar's value to the Government's precious metal holdings. Today the United States economy depends upon consumer spending and the amount of remaining credit card credit and home equity. Today our economy is based upon credit rather than capital.

In 1980 Ronald Reagan promised to cut taxes, increase military spending, and balance the budget by 1984! Was this a campaign promise, or a conscious lie? This is the true confession of an insider on the Reagan team. It seems that cutting taxes was the easy part, it just required passing a popular law. Spending created benefits for groups who will object to any reduction. Machiavelli noted that any changed law is difficult because those who benefit from the old way are united in objection, but those who would benefit from the new way have not experienced the proposed benefits.

Stockman says "poverty programs" could not be reduced, and blames it on politicians like Bob Dole and George McGovern (p.410). Don't they represent food producing area whose products can be bought with food stamps? Don't the grocery chains profit from these sales? Don't other chain stores profit from any money not spent on food? Stockman only looked at one part of this system, and used his prejudgment to condemn this part. He did not understand the working of the system.

The book tells of the results of the "Atlantic" article on Washington. Stockman seemed surprised that his rivals and political enemies ganged up on him (p.6)! He also seemed surprised that those with opposing politics could misquote him! (It does show how the press can be controlled to target a politician.) Senator Lowell Weicker described Stockman this way: "He's had his head up his ... from day one" (p.389). This books supports that opinion; why else would he write a very readable book about his mistakes?

Pages 10-11 tell about "an inflation-swollen economy". But he dances around the control of the money supply by a Private Banking Cartel (pp.62-3), an important subject. Stockman blames "politicians" for debasement of the currency, but ignores the fact of who controls the politicians! If Corporate Capitalists control politicians, then they must be the ones who benefit from controlled inflation. The topic of the "gold standard" masks the fact that silver has been used for money for countless centuries, right down to 1964 in America (remember silver dimes?). Weicker's location of Stockman's head rings true here.

Reagan's picked biographer said he was senile by his second term, and may have been in his first. Page 10 supports this opinion. What does this say about our political system? Has anything like this happened since a dead El Cid was tied to a horse?

Stockman's "revolution" required redefining fairness (p.11). It meant an absolute limit on Social Security payouts. Everyone working pays into Social Security, but the benefits are skewed towards longevity (which may omit the oppressed and exploited classes). Cui bono?

Page 41 lists the economic problems of the 1970s: speculation over production (the rewards of capital gains over income), and inflation (devaluation of the dollar). Stabilizing the dollar (a silver standard), and higher marginal tax rates appear to be the correct and untried cure. The Chrysler Corporation bail-out resulted from the Rockefeller-controlled forced borrowing; this is censored here (p.42). Dumping Rockefeller's bankers and putting UAW representatives on Chrysler's board did save it for the next twenty years.

David Stockman, a supply-side economist, was the director of the budget for Ronald Reagan. What a thankless task. He wanted to cut spending. Reagan wanted to cut taxes without cutting services, or making himself unpopular. The end result was record deficits, and a burgeoning debt.

Mr. Stockman writes with unflinching candor about his naivete of the political and budget process. He shares his frustrations with the reader. This book is particularly instructive twenty years later as Congress tries to keep the recent tax cut intact without blowing the budget out of the water. Watch the mirrors closely, boys and girls!

Book 3 of the series.

Well, I was hoping for something as quirky and smoothly written as the first two books. It was good, and it is an ending to a series I enjoyed, but it's not as good as the begining. Maybe it's just that it reveals too much at the end, sometimes a little mystery is more satisfying than a full disclosure. With that in mind, I'll shut up now.

This is the concluding book of the JOURNEYS OF THE CATECHIST trilogy, the first two being CARNIVORES OF LIGHT AND DARKNESS and INTO THE THINKING KINGDOMS. As with the first two books, this was a light, enjoyable read that provided a satisfying conclusion to the series. There isn't much difference in the storytelling between the previous books and this one. The characters still run into one obstacle after another and always miraculously overcome it uitlizing some gift from Etjole's backpack. Still, it is a fun journey and I enjoyed the climax of the story. It was definitely unexpected.

Again, though, I have to voice my complaint of the dearth of character development. I have never seen four more static characters in all the fantasy I have read. I wouldn't expect for Etjole or Alitah to change much, but I had high expectations for Simna. He could have developed into a more interesting character than the treasure seeking person that he is. Not that he's a bad person, but, rather, he seems to have only a one track mind. Unfortunately, this never changes throughout the three books, despite the fact that Mr. Foster put him in several situations that should have had a serious impact on his character. Unfortunately, the author chose not to take advantage of these opportunities.

One thing I thoroughly enjoyed were the chapters on Hymneth, the antagonist of the story. Mr. Foster completely redeems himself from the cliched first chapter of INTO THE THINKING KINGDOMS in which we got our first glimpse of our villain. Hymneth is revealed to be a rather interesting character with different motivations than most fantasy villains. We get the quick version of the story of his life and we...well, I'll leave it to you to read the book. I don't want to ruin anything. Suffice it to say, the ending of the book is a unique twist on fantasy story resolution.

All in all, I truly enjoyed reading this series. Etjole is a very intersting character and his journeys through distant lands and the characters he meets there are truly fascinating. The storytelling is a bit repetetive at times and the characters can be infuriatingly static, but it is a romping adventure that is different than most epic fantasy out there today.

A brilliant series by Mr. Foster. The first book of the series was lovely masterpiece, the second did not quite fullfill the hopes the first had promised, this last one was, in my opinion, again better than the second. Maybe not achieving quite the free floating feeling of the first book, but a great story all the same. The whole series a lovely story, recommendated.

This book is the first I have read to hear from the mother's side of an eating disorder. However, it is a bit unrealistic in the world of eating disorders. The daughter developed bulimia, and the mother had enough insight to get her treatment before it was terribly out of control. The whole episode from the "onset" to "recovery" was less than 2 years. It's great that she is fully recovered, but it is unrealistic in eating disorders that have plagued women for 5, 10, 20 years. Don't expect any enlightenment or answers from this book. Like I said, it is only good to read the mother's viewpoint while this "eating disorder" suffered. Look elsewhere for answers on true, long-term eating disorders.

I found this book to be refreshingly real and raw. Beyond the scope of eating disorders it addressed everyday issues I think many teen girls are battling with. As a woman in my mid-twenties, I related to much of Tara's thoughts while also gaining a sense of empathy for the struggles I put my own mother through.

I think every woman will relate to at least some aspect of the Rio's story. As a recovered bulimic, I've read MANY books about eating disorders. However, few have touched me the way this one has. I'm tired of reading books from a clinical point of view. This one read like a soap opera and kept my interest to the very end.

I was attracted to this book when I saw it on the "New Releases" shelf at the library. I could tell it hadn't been read, and the title appealed to the voyeuristic part of me that enjoys peering into people's (published) diaries. I found the book to be extremely insightful and interesting, as it beautifully and honestly depicted the inner workings of a teenage daughter and her mother. I loved how the book was frank and blunt, (as I suppose it had to be, being a real diary) and it truly opened my eyes to the trials and tribulations that a mother faces while watching her daughter go through sickness and coming of age.
I would recommend this book to any female I know.

This book does a good job of illustrating the tragedy inherent to competitive climbing. Hargreaves appears to have been a decent, determined, moderately talented climber, who pushed herself far beyond the point where she was actually enjoying the sport because of her need to make a living and her competitive surroundings. I usually dislike biographies, but found this one quite readable. While the authors do dumb down climbing terminology, they give evocative and gripping descriptions of the sport. This book saddened me, not only in its depiction of someone whose inspiration turned into her doom, but in its revelation of pervasive sexism in the way Hargreaves was viewed. While I don't think a woman who is still breast feeding should be free soloing, as she did (under the pressure of a relationship with an utter ne'er-do-well), the media suggestion that she was somehow a "bad mother" or "bad woman" because she climbed dangerous routes while having young children at home is preposterous. She was, in fact, financially supporting her children by doing so. This is an interesting book, worth reading.

Alison Hargreaves was probably one of the most enigmatic climbers of this century. Isolated from the mountaineering community at large for the better part of her career, it was not until she climbed Everest without support and without supplementary oxygen that she got the recognition she so craved. Her solo ascent of Everest without oxygen was the first ever such summit by a woman.

Her need for that recognition was twofold. She seemed to lack personal self-esteem, as a result of her marriage to a man who was emotionally and physically abusive. She also seemed to have a lack of confidence, at times, in her innate ability as a climber, needing validation from the mountaineering community, a validation which seemed to be long in coming. Yet, it was only on the mountains that she felt in control, because her personal life was so out of control. Indecisive about what to do about her unhappy marriage, the mountains gave her hope that she would be able to secure herself and her children financially and free herself from the bondage of an unhappy union.

When she triumphed on Everest, and her future as a climber of reknown seem assured, she almost immediately set out on expedition under pressure from her husband to summit K2, leaving behind her two beloved young children. While she ultimately met with success and reached the summit of K2, she descended head long into a storm with gale force winds. Sadly, she never got off the mountain, consigned to the environs of K2 for all time.

Her death created a maelstrom of controversy at the time, over the idea of a mother with two small children having put herself so at risk of leaving them motherless. Sadly, it was women journalists who spearheaded this sentiment, threatening to destroy Ms. Hargreaves' reputation in death. This was clearly a double standard, as many who die while climbing are men who are fathers to small children. Yet, in death they are not pilloried for having left their children fatherless. Rather, they are often heralded for their daring and courage in attempting to scale new heights.

This book chronicles Ms. Hargreaves' life and her love of climbing. It attempts to paint a balanced portrait of a woman so little known to the world at large, but who made mountaineering history just before her death. It explores her personal life, not only as a wife and mother, but as a person for whom climbing was her life's blood. The author attempts to understand her approach to climbing, as well as her exploits, and ground them in the context out of which they arose. It is the story of an ordinary woman who just before her death made herself extraordinary. Although the author recounts Ms. Hargreaves' life in a somewhat prosaic manner, it is definitely a book well worth reading.

When I first read the description of this book, I was only slightly intrigued but since I was running out of Himalayan mountaineering reading material, I decided to give it a try. As a mother, my first impression of a woman with young children risking her life by climbing was negative. This was somewhat hypocritical for me since I believe that women should be given an equal chance, particularly in athletic pursuits, and, as the book points, many male mountaineers are fathers. After reading about her circumstances and what she went through in her marriage physically, mentally, and financially, I understood her drive and came to see that climbing had become a necessity for her financially. As a working mother, I completely sympathized with her pull to provide for her family and yet have the time to spend with her children. Only for a climber, the stakes are greater. This woman suffered so many tough breaks in her personal and climbing life, and was later vilified for being a reckless mother instead of being respected for her amazing performances. With so many accomplishments under her belt, I was surprised that I'd never heard of her before. While it wasn't the best book I've ever read, I did find it hard to put down.

There really is one very good thing about this novel. It is the last one. With no EEEEVVVILL France left, Sir Percy must find a new hobby. Perhaps he will take up bottle-cap collecing. Anyways, I harbor particularly averse feelings to this particular episode of Pimpernel antics because of its sickening portrayal of Robespierre. Orczy sure outdoes herself in terms of historical laughability this time. Actually, I would laugh but I'm too scared thinking off all the poor misguided people who take the Baronness' word on this. OK, tell me...is there something wrong with this picture. Robespierre, that EEEVVVVILLL man, dreams of beheading all of France. Saint-Just, who anyone who knows anything about the Revolution at all knows was more radical than R and who supported Robespierre in everything, is described as "one of the most romantic figures of the entire Revolution." This is enough to make one's head ache, if one were inclined to believe that it is of the least importance at all. Fortunately for me, I am saved from that unhappy predicament. Like all the rest of the Pimpernel novels this is a series of unlikely adventures rescuing aristos...to heck with the common people!....with very little grace of writing and an absolutely deplorable grasp on reality.

Triumph is the first SP book I've read after the original story. I enjoyed it, but it wasn't excellent. I found the beginning to be very drawn out; it took me a very long time to read the first 75 pages or so, before it got going. Once it did start, (with Theresia and SP meeting for the first time) I found it to be fast paced, and I looked forward to reading it. However, the long beginning brought it down to a 3 star book for me. Also, the ending wasn't really explained at all...one second, literally, Robespierre is the tyrant in charge, next paragraph, well, no spoiler, but suffice to say he's not. Even in real life, the change was not so dramatic, and surely Orczy could have written a page or two more explaination.

Furthermore, I was disappointed that while St. Just, Andrew, and Tony were mentioned, that was about it; they were barely in the picture at all.

A fun adventure.....but not much more than that.

Triumph is an excellent ending to an excellent series. Sir Percy has to face his most difficult challenge. One that will bring him face to face with his most implacable enemey, and also save the life of the woman he adores. Full of Pimpernel wit and audacity, this is a must for all Pimpernel fans!

This was an okay book, though it probably could have been better. The book includes a history of the sport, its first superstars, the gymnastics events, judging and scoring, a day in the life of a gymnast, superstars of the 1990s, a chapter about the dangers of the sport, (more on that later) a timeline of important gymnastics dates, and trivia and facts. The book is a little dated and could use some updating, and the chapter that dissapointed me a lot was the chapter about "the price of success". Dan Gutman fails to mention that these things don't happen in every sport. He also fails to point out that he is talking about the ELITE level of gymnastics. Anyone who has read "Little Girls in Pretty Boxes" will see that Gutman's source for the ENTIRE chapter was based upon that book! Dan Gutmnan used the same exact information just with different wording! That chapter clearly does not fit in with the rest of the book, which says nothing of the dark side of these sports. If you want to buy this book, I would say save your money and buy a different book- this one isn't the best.

I thought that the book was excellent! It was very well written and it covered a lot of important and interesting things. I would've rated this book at 5 star, but I heard that in a short story about a girl that died because her head slammed into the vault and her neck snapped, then she went into a coma and died, the author didn't mention that when she was in the hospitol her air tube came out and they couldn't put it back in, and that's what made her go into a coma ( and as a result die) that made me angry because I expect the REAL facts when I read a book.

wow I thought the book thoughlly explained
this graceful and dynamic sport> I recommend this
book to any fan or gymnast.Some people may not agree
with my comments or rating but hey, thats
there opoinion!I am a competitive gymnast and that is
probably why I enjoyed the book so much!

In this volume Andrew Tobias shares his adventures in personal finance and politics. The political part is only relevant as a guide to how things are actually done in that arena and also as a warning about how such things affect one's personal finances ( and perhaps as a plug for auto insurance reform). Tobias uses his personal experiences to support his position that slow wins the personal fortune game, even for those with a small fortune to start with. His involvement with auto insurance reform cost him money. His real estate investments are still up in the air. His Russian company and advertisments on smoking hazards worked to a degree. What is really great about this book is that Tobias takes you along on a ride through his personal finances:where his money came from, where it went to. Those looking for a finance guide in this book alone will be disappointed. It is more like the "laboratory research" that supports his point of view in The Only Investment Guide You'll Ever Need. The only quibble I have with the book is that Chapter 6 Your Vast Fortune appears rushed and scattered. As another reviewer pointed out most of this book is magazine articles collected together. It may be that the parts written to hold it all together are second rate. However, the book is humorous and a good read. It is definitely worth the time. It is also very self-effacing although I am not sure of the sincerity of the author in this regard.

Ah, the elusive and mysterious world of personal finance. I first heard of Andrew Tobias from his website, where he dissects and explains all mutual funds expenses. Not all no-load funds are created equal, and I realized that thanks to him. This book is great to get a sense of who Andrew Tobias is, what his core investing philosophy is, and be entertained in the meantime (he has lived a fascinating life). I can see where those readers who know a couple of things about personal finance might be a bit frustrated with the book, which is more than anything an autobiography. It was certainly worth my while to read it, and I recommend it.

The other reviews cover the contents quite well. This is a book that has tidbits which have stuck with me over time, such as Tobias' account of how he purchased air-time in Russia to warn people there about the dangers of smoking and foreign cigarette companies. Probably the most influential chapter for me in this election year is the one on auto insurance reform, in that it paints a picture of Ralph Nader as someone who is all-too-human on this issue. Mr. Nader appears to make up his mind early on to support his lawyer friends, and has a "please don't confuse me with the facts" attitude. Obviously this is Tobias' own view of the world, but as a liberal and a man whose father helped Nader first become famous, he is sad to see Nader refuse to even discuss the issue with him.

The book occasionally meanders through topics and areas with little focus, such as his account of protracted real-estate headaches. That said, it is enjoyable overall in many ways and I definitely recommend it.

For a few chapters, I thought this was simply the worst book about baseball I'd ever read. The late genius Prof. Gould seemed less interested in entertaining or informing than in impressing us with obscure allusions and dropping the name of every other genius or celebrity he's ever met. But then it occurred that perhaps Gould was parodying the pompous blowhards he probably spent most of his life enduring in academe. Consider these two sentences from Ch. 8 alone:

"We may, on the rarest of occasions, enjoy the privilege of watching a person who can do something so much better than anyone else on the planet that we have to wonder if he really belongs to our universal tribe of Homo sapiens. I can cite only two such experiences in my previous fifty-seven years of life, both musical: when, in the late 1960s, I heard Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau sing Schubert's Die Schone Mullerin, and even his triple pianissimos penetrated like pinpricks of utter beauty to my seat in the last row of the last balcony of Symphony Hall; and when, two years ago at the Metropolitan Opera, I saw the world's greatest performers in each part boost their combined talents far above the sum of their individual strengths when they sang the first act of Wagner's Die Walkure: Placido Domingo as Siegmund, Deborah Voigt as Sieglinde, and Matti Salminen as Hunding, with James Levine conducting the finest orchestra ever assembled in operatic history."

Phew. Now that's remarkably boring and self-absorbed--but when you imagine an arrogant snob like Frasier Crane delivering those words, it becomes sort of amusing. And could it be that was what Gould was going for? To satirize, rather than nauseate?

Naaaa. This book is not about baseball or much else beside Gould's need to impress us with his Big Brain, Refined Taste, and Fabulous Life (which he remembered in excrucitaing detail). Don't waste your time.

Based on Prof. Gould's previous books and his appearances in, among others, the Ken Burns Baseball series, I was supremely disappointed by this book, although perhaps for reasons other than those expressed by other reviewers.

Anyone who has read Prof. Gould's other books should know that he is an acquired taste, whether his subject is baseball, paleontology, evolution, or what have you. Many of his books have passages or whole sections that are simply unreadable but the remainder manages to buoy them up. However, because Prof. Gould was in the process of dying as he finished some of the later dated essays and the rest are culled from his history of writing on the sport, it only stands to reason that there is going to be a lot of repetition (he traces his family's history of Yankee fandom so many times I lost count) and his better chapters are the shorter, more distinct ones than the lengthy scientific breakdowns like why no one hits .400 any more.

I could have done without the last section of baseball book and movie reviews - they were okay but they didn't do anything for me, perhaps because Prof. Gould was simply reacting to the work of others rather than producing his own contemplations.

It is a true shame that Prof. Gould's last work should leave so much to be desired, but there are lots of other volumes of his out there if one wants to revisit them.

Two things are crystal after the first eight or so essays in Triumph: Gould hails from New York, and he grew up rooting for the Yankees.

That's, apparently, all he had to say in the first section.

I hated it: an egocentric and elongated indulgence into his childhood, peppered with snippets of baseball history to build up his credibility.

But the tone shifted.

Triumph comes in four pieces: one's the aforementioned section on Gould himself; the second's on "hereos," including Mantle and Thorpe; third's on baseball as a sport and a piece of culture, and the fourth's a collection of book and movie reviews.

If you can stomach (or skip) the 47 pages of "Reflections and Experiences," do it: the rest is surprisingly pleasant. You'll find good works on why Jim Thorpe might be the greatest athlete ever, why The Babe (the movie) was terrible, and the creation myths of baseball.

He's not Roger Angell, but Gould did pretty well.

As much as I respect Ben Bova as an author, alternate history is apparently not his strongest point. While the narrative has a nice flow, and the characters are developed well enough to appear three-dimensional, the author's research of the names of the Soviet historical figures borders on amateurish, considering the way they are spelled. The premise of the book is also not particularly believable; in the years immediately following World War II, Russian people were too thoroughly indocrinated and feeling too patriotic to undertake any type of action that would undermine the power of the nation as a whole, and in this light the assassination of Stalin, even in such covert manner, would be highly unlikely.

A very nicely written novel. Triumph, by Ben Bova, does not attempt to paint detailed character maps or development. What the book does is take characters we are already familiar with, i.e. Stalin, Roosevelt, etc, or those that we can immediately relate to and use them to tell a tightly scripted tale.

This is not a traditional fiction novel or even a traditional alternate history tale. This book covers a very few days, about one month, and explores how events in April 1945 would have changed if Franklin Roosevelt had not died in mid April but Stalin had. The book is not as concerned with story telling as plausibility.

Triumph is a relatively short, tightly written book that I recommend with no reservations.

Ben Bova's novel, 'Triumph,' is a look at just how the closing days of World War Two could have been different if Stalin had not survived to enslave Eastern Europe. April, 1945: Winston Churchill, fearing the coming cold war with Soviet Russia, gives an order that will change history- the assassination of Josef Stalin. The events that follow from this fantastic decision alter the course of the war slightly, but very definatly. Bova's use of historical characters is first rate. From General George S. Patton seeking a way to beat the Russians to Berlin, to an insane Adolf Hitler hidden in his bunker, to Franklin Roosevelt overseeing the final victory, to a young Yuri Gagarin with dreams of traveling to the stars, this a fun and interesting look at what might have been.

Tax laws may have changed, some of the main actors are serving jail time, but it doesn't matter. This is the best case study of congressional decision making available. I still use this in courses because there is no better example of the tension between political horse trading and genuine reformist impulses available.

Is it detailed? Of course it is: the back and forth in the Ways and Means committee, for example, illustrates the kind of negotiaions that are the bread and butter of policy making.

Is there material that is "in the encyclopedia?" That is silly. There is little there that is basic review. In fact, anyone who found this boring probably does not know the basics of congressional procedures -- that is not the goal of this book -- or has a professor or teacher who does not know how to link a journalistic case study like this with the textbook or scholarly treatment of Congress.

A classic.

While this book may not appeal to students in search of the CliffNotes version of the political process, this exhaustive account of the1986 tax reform bill gets a complicated story just about right. Especially when it concerns the tax code, the devil is in the details, and while B&M sometimes go a little overboard in describing the small print of oil depletion allowances and the like, the fact is that Congressmen think that way -- and voters had better know it. All in all, a solid addition to the 'how a bill becomes a law' ouevre. Plus, it makes you like an odd array of people: Ronald Reagan, Bill Bradley, and even Bob Packwood. Where are they now?... END

the best book I was ever required to read for a class