From Publishers Weekly
Copyright 2001 Cahners Business Information, Inc.
From Library Journal
Copyright 2001 Reed Business Information, Inc.
Try it free |
Read books on your computer or other mobile devices with our FREE Kindle Reading Apps.
|
| ||
| ||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright 2001 Cahners Business Information, Inc.
Product Details
Would you like to give feedback on images?
|
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
10 of 12 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Could be TOO thorough,
By Kevin Currie-Knight "Education Grad Student" (Newark, Delaware) - See all my reviews (VINE VOICE) (TOP 500 REVIEWER)
This review is from: Breaking the Deadlock: The 2000 Election, the Constitution, and the Courts (Hardcover)
People have been quick to dismiss this book as right wing apologia written by a sneaky Bush supporter under the guise of analysis. However, those same people see Dershowitz's "Supreme Injustice" as an objective, non-partisan account? Dershowitz is a defense lawyer. What do they use? Rhetoric. Posner is a judge. What do they use? REASON.As one who did not voter for Bush, Gore or Nader, I can say that this is the most intellegent, thorough and fair accounts given of the 2000 fiasco. The one thing it's NOT is the most readable. If you don't want numbers, textual explanations of obscure state clauses and discourses on democratic theory, this one will be a doozy. If you DO want a beach read, I direct you to Bugliosi. Also, if it's conservative apologia you're after, do yourself a favor and just watch Fox News. Posner is not a pundit, he is a judge. He does not defend Katherine Harris's decision not to accept late recounts as a 'conservative,' he does so because the law gave her discretion. He refrains from bashing the supreme court decision, not as a conservative (he correctly disagrees with their 'equal protection' reasoning), he does so as a judge realizing they did the best they could in the time they had. The key thing to take from this book is that he doesn't slam anyone (except for some overzeolous pundits). Second guessing motive is a slippery slope and he admirably refrains from left or right bashing. What we are left with is facts. As mentioned earlier, Dershowitz, as a defense lawyer, has proven one of the most effective rhetoricists on the planet. My guess is that a major reason this book didn't sell so well is because the rhetoric is absent. The major flaw is that if Posner wnated to write a book for the lay person, he failed. This book, if you've no coffee around will make you dizzy. My reccomendation, read Bugliosi for a warm-up, Dershowitz for a light jog, and these will have worked you up to Posner. This is serious business!!
7 of 8 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
All the votes that are fit to count....,
By
Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Breaking the Deadlock: The 2000 Election, the Constitution, and the Courts (Hardcover)
We are a little over a year away from the 2004 Presidential election and you can bet that the 2000 election will cast its shadow over the electorate. For that reason, Breaking the Deadlock remains a very timely read. Going into 2004, it's worth bearing in mind the book's central point: that the question of who won the popular vote in Florida was not a question of fact, but of law. "If the recount was unlawful, the winner of the recount would not be the winner of the election even if he was in some sense the more popular candidate." At the same time,however, Judge Posner acknowledges that Courts, including the Supreme Court, that interpret the law, and were interpreting Florida election, and U.S. Constitutional law in 2000, are themselves exercising a level of discretion that invariably calls into play extra-legal factors. The "people" shall be judge, as the sagacious philosopher Mr. Locke asserted, but who then are the people? Who counts? This text confronts that question. Not all of the material covered in this book was new to me. Still, I learned a significant amount about the 2000 election, and about the electoral process in general. Teachers, students and voters in general will find in Breaking the Deadlock a superb survey of a critical facet of U.S. political life.
9 of 11 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTHS,
By "high_windows2" (Wellington, New Zealand) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Breaking the Deadlock: The 2000 Election, the Constitution, and the Courts (Hardcover)
In a masterpiece of understatement, Richard A. Posner was described in a 2001 New Yorker profile as a thorn in the side of left and right alike. Well, I suspect his conclusion that the Supreme Court was right in stopping the hand counts, but it's reasoning wasn't will enrage the usual inside the Beltway talking heads.Having trudged through a small mountain of incresingly hysterical, partisan 'analysis' of Bush v. Gore, I finished this book feeling like someone had opened a window and let out the hot gas. Posner brings the same clear-eyed, unsentimental and carefully argued perspective as 'An Affair of State', his equally controversial analysis of the Clinton impeachment. This book won't appeal to the usual partisan crowd, who only read to confirm their prejudices, and isn't designed to be an easy beach read -- so don't look for this at the top of the bestseller list. But this thoughtful and highly intelligent book should be. About the only book I've read on Bush v. Gore books that cast more light than partisan heat.
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
|
|
Tag this product(What's this?)Think of a tag as a keyword or label you consider is strongly related to this product.
Tags will help all customers organize and find favorite items. |
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|