|
| The Age of Reagan: A History, 1974-2008 | 
 enlarge | Author: Sean Wilentz
Publisher: Harper
Category: Book
List Price: $27.95
Buy New: $14.70
You Save: $13.25 (47%)
New (50) Used (14) Collectible (2) from $13.13
Avg. Customer Rating:  29 reviews
Sales Rank: 11265
Media: Hardcover
Edition: 1
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 576
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1.4
Dimensions (in): 9 x 6 x 1.6
ISBN: 0060744804
Dewey Decimal Number: 973.927
EAN: 9780060744809
ASIN: 0060744804
Publication Date: May 1, 2008
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Condition: Brand New!!!
|
| Customer Reviews:
 A Partisan History. June 15, 2008
16 out of 43 found this review helpful
I have never read a more partisan history. In the introduction, Wilentz equates intelligence with liberal thought. But, I imagined that was the simple self-congratulation of an academic. However, Wilentz really believes that. In Wilentz' world everything Republican is bad and everything Democrat is good, or at least not their fault.
Some highlights: When Chief Justice Rehnquist "growled 'Good Luck' at the swearing in," Hillary Clinton correctly surmised that Rehnquist had already unethically and unlawfully conspired to pervert justice in Clinton v. Jones. Bill Clinton was "obsessed" with Al Qaeda. FBI Director Louis Freeh was giving aid and comfort to the Republicans."
Check out this sentence in support of Wilentz' theory that the conservative Justices on the Bush v. Gore Supreme Court are the "most activist justices in our history": "And without question, partisanship could have operated, if only unconsciously, in the justices' thinking, though no doubt more so for some justices more than others." He doesn't tell us which justices were acting more unconsciously than the others, without question, no doubt, maybe. It was a 5-4 decision. If it had been 5-4 the other way, would that have still been an "activist" court? And seriously, Anthony Kennedy and Sandra Day O'Connor as partisan activists? They were notorious swing votes.
In Wilentz' world, Democrats who are acquitted are exonerated while Republicans who are acquitted remain "murky". Republicans "scurry". Like rats. Get it?
This book is not The Age of Reagan. It is, rather, Wilentz' brief based upon his admitted involvement in Bush v. Gore. It is as much, more really, Wilentz' belief that Bill Clinton made every governmental decision correctly.
Please understand: I am not anti-Clinton or pro-Bush. Far from it. But this is really bad history.
Caveat Emptor - Anti-Reagan at best May 29, 2008
14 out of 63 found this review helpful
This book is far from objective despite the author's attempt to sell it as such. I gave this book 165 pages (stopping about 300 pages short) before tossing it in the recycle bin.
An attempt to offer an objective review of Reagan and the conservative movement? Where is the objectivity? And remember, back-handed compliments do not count. For sports fans the book was as objective as a game where the referees hand out last minute foul calls to even up the free throws long after they have already impacted the final outcome of the game.
I was hoping to be both supported and challenged in my views of Reagan's era. Instead I found myself saying, enough is enough. I regret this purchase.
 Could be subtitled "The Age of Cheney" June 15, 2008
12 out of 21 found this review helpful
This is a good "connect the dots" book; Wilentz breaks no new investigative ground, but does a good job of showing how the "Age of Reagan" carried far beyond the Gipper's end of service.
As I alluded in my review title, whether consciously on his part or not, Wilentz has Cheney "popping up" on a regular basis, usually connected in some way to his defining, formulating and trying to advance his "unitary executive" ideas.
And, although Wilentz doesn't postulate an official "Age of Cheney," nonetheless, the looming end of Reaganism that he discusses in his epilogue certainly applies to Cheneyism as well.
With his "connect the dots" work, Wilentz stimulates some counterfactual history thoughts:
1. What if Reagan had been less amateurish in his 1968 attempt to wrestle the GOP nomination from Nixon? (My prediction: Even the war-saddled HHH would have beaten him and Reagan would have been on the ash-heap of history.)
2. What if George H.W. and not Rocky had been Ford's (correcting erroneous Nixon's) VP appointment?
3. What if Gorbachev hadn't, in essence, bailed out Reagan's second term? Would we even be talking about the "Age of Reagan"?
4. How would the Clinton years have been different if he had tried welfare reform before national healthcare?
5. How would they have been different if Jeff Gerth hadn't been ax-grinding at least, mendacious at worst, about his pre-1992 election "coverage" of Whitewater?
6. Would Gore had been better served with another VP candidate than Lieberman, one who didn't care about Clinton's Lewinsky issue one way or the other, like a governor?
Wilentz certainly isn't alone in postulating the crackup of the GOP on the splintering of libertarians, big biz conservatives and social conservatives, but by doing a good overall job of showing how and why they coalesced around Reagan (though this could have stood another 20 pages or so), he shows more of why they're likely to split.
Revisionist August 9, 2008
12 out of 35 found this review helpful
Until I read this dribble, I was under the impression that the Carter Presidency was one of the worst in American History, and I thought President Clinton was held in contempt. I never knew the the downfall of communism was brought about by President Carter along with his leadership in directing the amazing economy we experienced during his term. More of the amazing leadership is described about the Clinton leadership.
According to the author, Reagan was simply lucky to become President, and he really did not have anything positive to contribute to the American Republic or the world at large.
The author should be ashamed of this literary effort.
I place every book I have ever read in my library. For the first time in 55 years, I was moved to throw this diatribe in the recycle bin. I did not want it to go into the trash to take up space. I thought it best to send it somewhere where the paper could do something more meaningful in the future.
Excellent Book July 5, 2008
10 out of 18 found this review helpful
It's what you expect! The negative reviews of this book comes from those with a mythical opinion of Reagan. In the introduction the author states that the book is different from the current selection of books on the Reagan Era, which either elevates Reagan to God status or treats him as the Devil. The book is meant to explore WHY the age of Reagan occured. If you want the regular old deification, there are plenty of books which do that. If you are looking for a book which looks at primary sources (the Holy Grail for Historians), then this is your book. Buy it and enjoy, it is excellent.
|
|
|
Powered by Associate-O-Matic
| |
