[The Electric Library] [Go to Best Part][Image] [Image][Image] [Image] [Image][Image] Book reviews. JFK ASSASSINATION BOOKS FRANK RAGANO and SELWYN RAAB, Mob Lawyer (New York: Charles Scribner' s Sons, 1994), 372 pp. $22.00 hardcover (ISBN 0-684-19568-2). HARRISON EDWARD LIVINGSTON, High Treason 2: The Great Coverup: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy (New York: Carroll & Graf, 1992), 656 pp. $25.95 hardcover (ISBN 0-88184-809-3). HARRISON EDWARD LIVINGSTON, Killing the Truth: Deceit and Deception in the JFK Case. (New York: Carroll & Graf, 1993), 752 pp. $27.95 hardcover (ISBN 0-88184-428-4). BARBIE ZELIZER, Covering the Body: The Kennedy Assassination, The Media, and the Shaping of Collective Memory. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992), vii, 299 pp. $14.95 paper (ISBN 0-226-97971-7). ANTHONY FREWIN, The Assassination of John F. Kennedy: An Annotated Film, TV, and Videography, 1963-1992, Foreword by Martin Short (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1993), xv, 174 pp., $49.95 hardcover (ISBN 0-313- 28982-4). GERALD POSNER, Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK (New York and Toronto: Random House, 1993), xv, 609 pp., including illustrations and notes, $25.00 hardcover (ISBN 0-679-41825-3). PETER DALE SCOTT, Deep Politics and the Death of JFK (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press: 1993), 413 pp. (ISBN 0-520-08410-1). Americans have long had a love affair with the idea of conspiracy. Today, aided and abetted by a daily dose of television drama, our citizenry has come to expect ulterior motives, complex, byzantine plots with a simple denouement worked out in the span of sixty minutes, commercials included. Thus it is that the assassination of President John F. Kennedy has already been the subject of over two thousand books, innumerable articles, panels, radio and television discussion shows, and movies. Many have wondered if it were possible for a lone gunman to have killed the president, a young vital vibrant member of a "new generation to whom the torch had recently been passed." The question becomes all the harder to answer positively when one inquires into the background of the one person who is supposed to have committed the act: the perpetrator turns out to have been a 24 year old misfit and a failure at almost everything he had tried up to that fateful November day in Dallas. Anyone who has lived through those tragic days remembers the scenario with incredulity. Almost every shared a common initial reaction: the dastardly deed had to have been done by a foreign power or a member of some lunatic right wing organization. When it turned out that the suspect was a person who had spent time in the Soviet Union as an expatriate, the plot thickened and became all the less believable. Within the span of less than 48 hours, the perpetrator had been murdered by another person of seamy background. Could the American system have been subverted so easily by two persons each with such a questionable pedigree? A positive answer to this question would make the citizenry feel endangered and vulnerable; on the other hand, a negative response could force a differing and perhaps more dangerous reaction: an alien power had subverted our system. In the latter scenario, were the conspiracy to have been orchestrated from abroad, popular reaction would inexorably force a Sarajevo-like backlash, something impossible in the thermonuclear age. Thus, neither explanation was palatable; never mind what had really happened. In an attempt to deal with the already obvious conundrum, one of the first acts of the new president, Lyndon B. Johnson, was to convene a "blue ribbon" panel, soon to become known to all as the Warren Commission, to investigate all the facts surrounding the tragedy and to present a report to the American people as quickly as possible. Sadly, the group's research was shoddy, its product badly assembled, leaving its conclusions poorly based, providing opportunities for anyone seeking a headline, a movie or a book contract to offer a "new and startling revelation." Within the space of thirty years, Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson, Richard Nixon, future Watergaters, the Central Intelligence agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Texas oil millionaires as personified by H. L. Hunt or the Murchisons, the military establishment, the Mafia, the Russians, and the Cubans have all been listed as dramatis personae by at least one author. Surprisingly, only fellow travelers [in the motorcade] Jacqueline Kennedy and Texas governor John Connally have somehow escaped being cast as villains. Other authors have hypothesized that there may have been an Oswald "double" and, as a result, recently Oswald was disinterred to check whether the body was actually that of the alleged assassin. In the interests of full disclosure, from the first, this reviewer was not inclined to believe that Lee Harvey Oswald could possibly have been the sole assailant. Having interviewed a number of the early skeptics including Edward J. Epstein,[1] Mark Lane,[2] and the Attorney General in New Orleans, Earling Carothers "Jim" Garrison,[3] it was easy to be convinced that the Warren Commission Report was a "coverup." After all, the ramifications of many of the other plausible scenarios were so dire. The subsequent Watergate revelations did not help bulwark or restore faith in governmental veracity. When Gerald Ford, one of the members of the Warren Commission, became president and promised to end "this nightmare [referring to the Watergate controversy, not the assassination]," this reviewer speculated that at some point he would "level with the American people" and explain that, in an effort to avoid a catastrophic confrontation, the members had agreed to cover up evidence of a foreign based plot to assassinate the president. As we all$know, this never transpired; nevertheless, the lack of such an action has not deterred the doubters from continuing to publish works suggesting similar scenarios. Indeed, the promise of fat royalties, or box office receipts in the case of movies, not to mention notoriety, has stimulated a number of entrepreneurs to merchandise their idea of history. And, despite the almost uniform lack of quality of their work, for the most part, it has been profitable for them and their sponsors. There are so many persons involved in the tangled web that one truly requires a scorecard to keep all the actors straight. Fortunately, Michael Benson has produced Who's Who in the JFK Assassination: An A- to Z-Encyclopedia which lists over 1400 personae, dramatis and otherwise. Unfortunately, has work panders to the conspiracy theorists and sensationalists. For instance, the entry on JFK includes the following passage: "He slept with women who also slept with mobsters. He considered dumping LBJ as his vice presidential candidate in 1964, JFK wanted to eliminate the oil depletion allowance. . . . He threatened to dismantle the CIA . . . [he] made plans to retire FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover." (p. 233) And the one for LBJ alleges that ". . . during the shooting sequence. LBJ had his ear pressed against a walkie-talkie that was 'turned down real low'. . . . According to Madeline Brown, who claims to have been LBJ's mistress at the time of the assassination. LBJ had foreknowledge of the assassination but did nothing about it because of his lust for power and his hatred for JFK." (pp. 222-223) These two samples are illustrative of the sometimes barely substantiateable material he uses and the twists Benson gives to many entries aiding those seeking "evidence" to establish new and convoluted conspiracies. Sadly, it quickly became clear that much of the contents is no more than unverifiable hearsay. That the "mob" or the Mafia played a role in the assassination is a theory that has been advanced from the first. Clearly, there had been grounds for provocation; JFK's younger brother, Robert [RFK], as Attorney General, had assembled a group of high powered investigators in the Department of Justice with instructions to "break the Mafia." For the Mafia, murder was an oft utilized tool to achieve its ends-in this case the end of the investigation-something that RFK would never do; and as long as JFK was in the White House, RFK would head Justice, not to mention have the ear of the president. Frank Ragano and Selwyn Raab's latest expose, Mob Lawyer, adheres to this line of reasoning. Sensational, to the point of emblazoning the dust jacket with "Including the inside account of who killed Jimmy Hoffa and JFK," it also plays to those with prurient interests. For instance, it recounts a story about JFK having attended an alleged sex party in Havana in 1957 arranged by Mafia boss Santo Trafficante and witnessed by mobsters through a two-way mirror. Apart from the second hand reminiscences of the author, however, there is no other corroborating evidence or proof; certainly, one would think that those involved would have known the value of incriminating photographs. Although not mentioned in the book, the publicity materials distributed by the publishers maintain that "Trafficante never believed that JFK would become president and thus he had not had any pictures taken." Clearly, something is wrong here because pictures would have been useful even dealing with a junior senator; but, even more important, as the runnerup candidate for the vice-presidential nomination in 1956, the youthful JFK was likely to have had other opportunities for higher national office in the future. With such lack of understanding of the political process by author and actor, there can be little value to the work. Harrison Edward Livingston has written essentially the same book in three different guises. First it was High Treason,[4] then, two years later, High Treason 2: The Great Coverup: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy. A best seller, it was quickly followed by Killing the Truth: Deceit and Deception in the JFK Case. According to his unlikely scenario, "Texas oil," as represented by H. L. Hunt and Clint Murchison, Jr., helped by LBJ, Richard Nixon and J. Edgar Hoover, were all involved, aided and abetted by a shadow organization using the Central Intelligence Agency as a front. There was an ambush at Dealey Square, more than one gunman was involved, pistol as well as gun shots were fired and heard; bullets came from the "grassy knoll" and perhaps also from a storm drain in an adjacent parking lot. Intelligence operatives were able to fake, plant, or steal evidence. X-ray records were doctored as were photographs and the autopsy report (High Treason 2, p. 99, Killing the Truth, pp. 99-100). But who actually committed the act? In High Treason 2, Livingston can only suggest that the "power elite" and Texas oil with help from its allies in the military, and that Far Eastern Section of the CIA were responsible; their rationale: JFK was not controllable; elections [in the United States are rigged from the start. All of those who have a chance of winning the presidency have long been picked by the power elite, as had Kennedy. . . Kennedy began to rub people the wrong way, as he became his own man. . . (p. 574, emphasis original). In Killing the Truth, he becomes more specific, there was a conspiracy led by LBJ or Hunt, with Murchison and Hoover as active co-conspirators. Each had a specific task: LBJ had to lure JFK to Dallas and then "whitewash the crime"; Hoover to pick one of the gunmen (Oswald), and the others to supply additional soldiers for an ambush (pp. 543-5). Earlier, however, we have been told that, because of the high degree of hate in Dallas, "Texas killed President Kennedy" (p. 518).[5] What sets Livingston's book apart from others of similar bent is that the author takes the time to demolish the theories of other conspiracists and, in the process, purports to reveal incongruous ties that allegedly has existed between various critics and their supporters. He thus claims, for instance, that Mark Lane, who ran for public office on New York City' s ultraliberal west side with Socialist support, allegedly was bankrolled by Murchison and, as a lawyer, had represented the Liberty Lobby, a notoriously right wing pressure group (pp. xxiii-xxiv). While a lawyer can and should be able to represent those of all political stripes without fear of retribution, ideological or otherwise, the question of acceptance of financial support is, however, totally different-but since satisfactory substantiation is lacking, it is not necessary to deal with the allegation. A university press imprint and a background as a Canadian diplomat have combined to give Peter Dale Scott a legitimacy undeserved by the content of his latest book, Deep Politics and the Death of JFK. Of similar philosophical persuasion as Livingston, he quickly dismisses the theory of Oswald as the lone assassin and he asserts that, immediately before the assassination, Kennedy had been planning to withdraw from Viet Nam; "Two days after the assassination" LBJ changed course (pp. 26-27). But there is more: The assassination, plus McCarthyism, Watergate, and Iran Contra [he calls it Contragate] were all crises that arose because of perceived threats to the prosecution of the Cold War (p. 303). Who then killed JFK? "[A] coalition of forces inside and outside government . . . . a deep political system" (p. 299). Throughout the book, phrases beginning with "deep" are utilized to substitute for substantiating charges after a buildup of barely provable half truths and innuendo often based on the most tenuous of ties or stories of sexual encounters. There is no doubt that Jean Hill witnessed the assassination; she is the woman in red recorded in the Zapruder film standing near the curbstone no more than ten feet away from the president as the bullets hit their target. What were her subsequent actions is a matter of some controversy and doubt. According to her new book, JFK: The Last Dissenting Witness, allegedly the first time she has told her story, she had attempted to greet one of the police in the motorcycle escort, had run part way up the "grassy knoll, " had been waylaid by a government official from a unknown agency, and had been harassed from that point onward. (But see section concerning Posner infra.) In spite of the forces arrayed against her, for many years, she has maintained that she had seen a person whom she sometimes identified as Jack Ruby shoot from the grassy knoll [and despite the fact that since the Spanish American War smokeless powder has been almost universally used, there was "a muzzle flash, a puff of smoke. . . ."], hitting the president in the head and exploding his skull [likely shot number 3]; furthermore, she is steadfast in her belief that more than three shots in all were fired, that the shots came from at least two different directions and that Oswald was not one of the assassins (pp. 25-30, 64-5, 248-8). Her book, introduced by Oliver Stone, recounts the incident in detail and is the tale of how her life allegedly was changed forever that fateful day, and how the Secret Service, the FBI, the CIA, and the Warren Commission purportedly tried every possible means to persuade her to modify her story. True to so many of the works that have cried conspiracy, JFK: The Last Dissenting Witness contains a section that recounts the untimely deaths of various "important personages." "[M]ore conspiracy and coverup?" The book asks pregnantly referring to the passing in I989! of three of the policemen who had ridden motor cycles flanking the presidential limousine, thus conveniently ignoring the fact that over a quarter of a century had elapsed since the assassination (p. 251). Were one to consider accepting the clearly implied possibility of foul play, the least one would have expected to find would be some sort of explanation as to why it took so long to get around to silencing them; there is no such passage. Barhie Zelizer's Covering the Body: The Kennedy Assassination, The Media, and The Shaping of Collective Memory is a most thought provoking work. Not so much a book detailing the actual assassination, as it is about how American journalists have told and retold the event both to the public and to themselves. Not simply satisfied with reporting the news, reporters are more interested in legitimizing themselves as "the story's authoritative spokespersons" (pp. 1-2); interestingly, however, she never uses the term "primary source" but if they had actually been on the scene, they would surely qualify as such. The work is divided into four parts with the first being an introduction providing the context including a fascinating portrait of the changing state of early 1960s journalism and a description of how the reporters were able to promote themselves as "authoritative spokespersons for the events of JFK's death." Part II details how the story evolved in the weeks immediately following the event. Part III covers the journalists attempts to self-promote as the assassination's "preferred retellers." The final section analyzes how the media has protected its hard won turf and managed to solidify its role as the "authoritative reteller." The lack of agreement as to exactly what happened on November 22, 1963, gave each actor an opportunity to try to gain personal stature while, at the same time, tell the story from his or her own specific perspective. The title is derived from the phrase used by all journalists given the assignment of following every step of a touring president; in this case there was a gruesome addition. Zeilzer is at her best when reviewing the treatment JFK, Oliver Stone' s cinematic treatment of the event. Although described as a "fictionalization" (p. 202), Stone clearly took himself far more seriously presenting his film as history or, at minimum, a call for a new investigation. The Wickers and Rathers who, in an attempt to remind their audiences of their central role in the reporting of the events, "credential" themselves before debunking Stone come across as self centered little children attempting one-upsmanship. This section should be required reading for all television interviewers and journalism students if only so they can learn how to avoid similar egotistical journeys. The extent of literary coverage of the vent has been duplicated in the field of television and film. Indeed, for many, this is the only source of information. Knowing the ideological tilt of a work can be of especial use to teachers utilizing film as a teaching tool. Anthony Frewin has compiled a massive listing with useful, and delightfully acerbic, descriptive paragraphs covering 283 entries. Although the author avers that "there is no evidence at all that can put a rifle in Lee Harvey Oswald's hands on the 22 November 1963" (p. xii), The Assassination of John F. Kennedy: An Annotated Film, TV, and Videography, 1963-1992 apparently has not left out listings of works with differing perspectives. The various cross-indices allow one searching for a specific work to find it with a relative degree of ease. Sadly, the physical appearance of the work will probably have an adverse effect on its influence and utilization: it appears to have been photo offset directly from an incompletely edited laser printed text. It is not even right justified. Remarkably few books have been published which support the Warren Commission findings that Oswald alone killed the president. Gerald Posner's Case Closed: Lee Hawey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK is the best of the group. Much to the disappointment of the conspiracists, it has been well received in both popular and scholarly circles. To "close the case, " it is necessary to answer and refute beyond a shadow of a doubt the arguments of all those who question the Oswald-as-sole-assassin scenario: this task Posner attempts with skill, using text, footnotes and endnotes. For the most part, the endnotes provide the regularly expected materials such as interview and other source citations while the footnotes are utilized to provide auxiliary evidence to buttress arguments in the text. As the subtitle clearly indicates, Posner is also most interested in the Oswald persona. The picture that emerges is one of a pathetic loser wanted by neither the USSR or American intelligence networks (p. 56). Drawing on new and personal interviews with Oswald's wife, Marina, other intimates, and recently declassified materials from KGB files, Posner paints Oswald as an unhappy introverted youngster in the oft-broken home of a wandering domineering mother (pp. 8-17). The onset of maturity did not lead to a better outlook, neither did his stint in the Marines. Seeking stature, he then opted to live in Russia. Despite having found a wife, and living better than the average citizen, he was still dissatisfied and resolved to return to the United States in his ever-elusive search for the "better life and acceptance." Later when he attempted to repeat his defection, but this time to Cuba, he was, to his dismay, rebuffed (p. 195). In the immediate period before the assassination, Oswald would attempt unsuccessfully to kill General Edwin Walker [ironically failing to hit an easy stationary target]. Posner uses recent scientific advances which have afforded researchers the ability to pinpoint the exact moment when the President and Governor Connally were struck by the bullets. Utilizing this information, plus computer enhancements to determine the exact trajectory of the second bullet, Posner, validates Dr. John Lat-timer's earlier carefully drawn conclusions about the "Kennedy-Connally Bullet,"[6] [what has come to be known as the "magic bullet"]. In the process, he is able to prove that the shot could only have been fired from one of only five windows in the Texas School Book Depository: included in this group is the Warren Commission-sanctioned location of Oswald's Sniper's Nest on the sixth floor (pp. 476-7). Unfortunately, however, this careful analysis covers only the second bullet. To prove the Oswald-as-sole-assassin contention conclusively would require a similar treatment of bullet #1 [impossible because it missed its target and has never been recovered] and #3, which hit the President in the skull. Analyzing the Zapruder film, Posner is also able to prove that, contrary to Ms. Hill's story, she did not run up the grassy knoll immediately after the shots were fired [later frames of the film reveal her not to have strayed from where she had stood as the president arrived in the motorcade); her romantic tale of having stepped into the roadway as she tried to make contact with a member of the president's motorcycle escort withers to wishful thinking under the Posner scrutiny of the film [enhanced frames of the film do not indicate that she attempted to make any contact, verbal or otherwise, with any of the police] (p. 251).[7] On the surface, one of the conspiracists most convincing arguments is that many of the witnesses to the assassination, or, for that matter, investigators who were getting "close to the truth," seem to have died mysteriously, and before their time. By the late 1980s, the total of persons alleged to have met such a fate had ballooned to 103.[8] Oliver Stone' s JFK accepts the statistic as fact, near the end of his film highlighting the names of many to dramatize his conspiracy theory. Posner carefully demolished the charge: First, he notes that none of the early Warren Commission critics suffered such an untimely and, in fact, surprisingly, as of the writing of his book, all were still alive and well. Jim Garrison and Oliver Stone himself were never "bothered" even though they both tried to "expose the lies." And Jean Hill was able to write her expose only last year (pp. 483-4). To close this part of the case, Posner digs further, cataloguing the exact cause of death for each person on the Marrs list (pp. 485-499). He found that fully 53 of the 101 [carelessly, two persons had been listed twice] were found to have died of natural causes. While 14 had died within a year of the assassination, it turned out that three had died of natural causes and, of the remaining eleven, their ties to the event turned out to have been so inconsequential as to prove little other than coincidence. As time passed, as might be expected, more and more of the victims came to have died of old age. As John Lattimer stated about the Lincoln assassination, "All of the witnesses to the Lincoln killing are dead today, but that does not prove the conspiracy!"[9] Posner devotes an interesting chapter to the background of Jack Ruby, in the process refuting the charge of his alleged ties to a conspiracy. There is little included to contradict the evidence that Ruby had underworld ties. That they existed, albeit something not admitted by Posner, does not mean that everything he did was done at the behest of the Mafia. Key to the theory of his involvement in an assassination plot is a record of long distance telephone calls made by Ruby. Posner carefully analyzes the list. It turns out that the suspicious calls had likely been made as part of his nightclub business (perhaps to underworld or union connections [a hypothesis of this author, not Posner]) before Kennedy had been scheduled to come to Dallas. Posner goes on to suggest that were there to have been such a conspiracy, it would have been unlikely that Oswald would have been allowed to get away alive from where he had made the shots; furthermore, in the event of his apprehension, there would have been no way of divining where Oswald would have been held (p. 365). Therefore, unless the plot were to have been so large that it involved conspirators with entre to all possible locations in which Oswald might have been incarcerated, the Ruby-as-conspirator theory would have little validity. Finally, even if one were to grant such a hypothetical: namely, that there were persons who could have gained access to each possible holding area; the conspiracy would have had to have been as large that it would have been difficult for it to have remained secret to this day. For instance, just envision the number of books on the subject that could have been written over the last thirty years! Furthermore, he reminds us that one must also note that as of this date not one person has come forward to claim responsibility for the act. Strangely, Posner's book attempts to rehabilitate Marina Oswald. Perhaps that is due to his having had the opportunity to interview her, something which has eluded most writers on the subject. Sadly, however, he falls into the trip of accepting many of her statements at face value, despite her well known reputation for having given sometimes misleading and conflicting testimony to the Warren Commission. What is especially distressing about this is that here we find a selectivity on the part of Posner, a charge he, himself, has leveled at many of the conspiracists. Thus, while he is apparently willing to accept Marina Oswald's statements, he quickly dismisses [and in this author's view, correctly] those of Jean Hill which are equally suspect, but which did not support his thesis. In the final analysis, Posner set for himself an almost impossible task. Any event of similar complexity would have produced differences of opinion as to who did what, when, and how they accomplished it. In the 1920s, Clarence Darrow demonstrated that persons running through a court room could produce wildly different interpretations of exactly what had happened. Absent complete recorded coverage of the assassination, one should expect little less of the event in Dallas. The problem is compounded by the fact that today, nearly everyone has a preconceived notion on the subject buttressed by an almost universal acceptance of the Camelot myth. This easily has been extended to a belief that "JFK had to have died for something," that one single person could not have accomplished the deed, and consequently, a group of conspirators was required. Furthermore, Posner had to deal with a story that is so complicated that no one could possibly have written a "flawless" piece.[10] Finally, to "close the case," Posner had to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, as opposed to innocence. And it is the reasonable doubt factor along with the errors that will surely be discovered by authors of opposing views which ensures two things: That there will continue to be more books and films on the subject, and that the authors and producers will be paid sizable royalties. Thus, the case can, alas, never be closed. Notes 1. Author of Inquest: The Warren Commission and the Establishment of the Truth (Bantam Books, New York: 1966), Counterplot (Viking Press, New York: 1968), and Legend: The Secret World of Lee Harvey Oswald (Readers Digest Press/McGraw Hill, New York: 1978). At different times, Epstein, Lane and Garrison were the reviewer's guests or panelists on Nighttalk, a radio discussion show heard at varying times on a number of radio stations throughout the country, including WOR (New York City), WBAL (Baltimore), WCLV (Cleveland), WIND (Chicago), and WAVA (Arlington, Virginia). 2. Author of Rush to Judgement (Holt Rinehart & Winston, New York: 1966). 3. A Author of A Heritage of Stone (Putnam, New York: 1970) and New Orleans District Attorney who indicted and unsuccessfully prosecuted Clay Shaw for conspiracy to assassinate JFK. His theoretical scenario was used by Oliver Stone in his film JFK. 4. (Baltimore: The Conservancy Press, 1989). 5. But contrast this to the friendly reception JFK received from the crowd leading Nelli Connally, the Governor's wife to remark just minutes before the assassination, "Mr. President, you can't say Dallas doesn't love you" [quoted in Rae Correlli, "Special Report: An American Tragedy," Macleans, vol. 106, #47, (November 22, 1993), p. 47]. 6. Kennedy and Lincoln: Medical and Ballistic Comparisons of Their Assassinations (New York and London: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1980), pp. 284-291. 7. Ms. Hill has not taken advantage of an opportunity to rebut these charges. The author has left several messages on her telephone answering machine offering her the chance to respond to Posner's assertions; she has never returned the calls. 8. Jim Marrs, Crossfire: The Plot to Kill Kennedy (New York: Carroll & Graf Publishers, 1989), pp. 555-556. 9. Interview with author taped for Nighttalk, November 22, 1980. 10. Peter Dale Scott, "Case Closed? Or Oswald Framed?" [review of Case Closed] 18 San Francisco Review of Books (November-December 1993), p. 6. ~~~~~~~~ By THEODORE P. KOVALEFF Chair, Community Board 9 Copyright 1994 by Center for the Study of the President. Text may not be copied without the express written permission of Center for the Study of the President. Kovaleff, Theodore, Book reviews.., Vol. 24, Presidential Studies Quarterly, 09-01-1994, pp 901.