No doubt Helen Thomas is one of the most respected and recognizable reporters over the past 50 years. Over the years she has observed some of the mostNo doubt Helen Thomas is one of the most respected and recognizable reporters over the past 50 years. Over the years she has observed some of the most powerful people to pass through our nation's capital. And she's been at it long enough that she has an above average perspective on things. She can see the 'big picture'.
While, in this book, she often does reference the 'big picture' she spends a lot of time focusing on specific instances where the media shined or fell flat on its face. Needless to say, Thomas thinks reporters and the public were better off back in her younger days.
She talks about the difficulties back then that they had to work through to get the story. She also states that today's reporters couldn't cutit back then. I couldn't tell if she faults the easy access of information (ie Internet) or schools or what. But basically she thinks that reporter's are too lazy (maybe?) to do the real work.
It all comes across very "When I was young I had to walk to school barefoot, in the snow, uphill... both ways."
Maybe that's not fair to what the she was trying to say, but it's the impression it left on me.
Maybe "not enough constructive ideas on contemporary events", would be a better way to put it. She spends equal amounts of ink slipping in attacks on current policy as she does the media. too much subjectivity for a reporter, in my opinion. But, hey, she's 86-years-old, maybe she's earned the right to let it fly.
It's a great refresher course of all the names and places that have shaped our country over the past few decades and nn ok read for anyone who enjoys studying the media....more
It's hard to argue with someone as well read and complete as Chomsky. So rarely do I find myself arguing with him, even when I disagree. As usual thisIt's hard to argue with someone as well read and complete as Chomsky. So rarely do I find myself arguing with him, even when I disagree. As usual this book presents some of Chomsky's very detailed analysis on US actions around the globe and his opinions on the outcomes of those actions. It seems a very clear line for Chomsky, between US actions over the past 20 years and the terrorist attacks of 9-11. A lot of the material in this book has been printed before in other Chomsky books. This one is sort of a "new organization of the timelines and 'cause and effect' policy notes" that Chomsky has presented. This is a strong read for anyone wanting to hear a clear concise voice on policies, politics, and history that pre-dates 9-11, whether you think those policies are to blame or not....more
It's always gratifying to read a book that you agree 100% with. This essay on US transatlantic relationships and policy making is right on the money.It's always gratifying to read a book that you agree 100% with. This essay on US transatlantic relationships and policy making is right on the money. Kagan pulls no punches in this one and his simple fact-of-the-matter rationale is hard to argue with and clear cut.
But just because he calls out Europe for exactly what they have been and are, he does it without getting nasty and schoolyardish about it. Which is refreshing in these times of O-Reilly and Heraldo.
Kagan acurately outlines why US foreign policy is what it is and why it will remain so. That is until someone else becomes king of the hill.
His parallels between Europe's historical actions and the US's current endeavors are clear and factual.
It's refreshing to read something on US policy that's not filled with the boasting and grandstanding that all of today's political books are filled with.
Kagan is the political science professor you'll wish you had in school and this book won't disappoint any reader. Whether you agree with him or not....more