Customer Reviews

Sexual McCarthyism : Clinton, Starr, and the Emerging Constitutional Crisis

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

Early on, Dershowitz informs his readers that he is a supporter of Clinton. Nevertheless, he uses several opportunities, throughout the book, to criticize Clinton for undermining people's civil rights. Perhaps ironically, Clinton himself may be on the receiving end of such policies in the form of Starr's questionable methods for gathering evidence. At any rate, this book is presented in a diary fashion, with a certain amount of interpolation and commentary provided with each entry. As a non-lawyer, I found Dershowitz's explanations intriguing as the intricacies of the law are expounded. As a pure legalist, Dershowitz criticizes the Clinton defense as being politically driven, the end result of which has been a presidency in jeopardy for legal reasons. The book is not so much a defense of Clinton and his actions as it is a story of how Dershowitz would have conducted Clinton's legal affairs during each critical phase of this crisis. I find his arguments compelling, although I'm not sure who wouldn't in hindsight. Overall, I think the book is very readable and I believe it gives non-lawyers insight into the legal system and why things are setup the way they are.

I must cofess to have been rather disappointed in Prof. Dershowitz's book, or rather, should I say, polemic. Any written work which combines unsubstantiated theory hidden behind a cloak of academic integrity, poses a greater threat to democracy than Clinton, Starr and the whole lot. Here is a typical case of the dictatorship of vocabulary so common of politicians, especially in light of the impeachment hearings against President Clinton. He often repeats the typical democratic mantra of "its a family matter," or "its a question of privacy." Not only that, his observations of Starr are, for the most part off the cuff insults and mere conclusions of a talking head on CNBC's epitome of shock jock journalism, The Geraldo Rivera Show. His references of Starr as a "puritanical prosecutor" and his theme of Starr's allegiances with right wing enemies of Clinton, smack of JFK and Oliver Stone. Ironically enough, on page 26 he refers to the "results oriented investigation of the assassination of President Kennedy," as an example of a cover-up.

A few other issues worth mentioning. The term "sexual McCarthyism" is a tad disingenuious considering the fact that what McCarthy was known for, his pursuit of Communists, for the most part, lacked evidence. Starr seems to have more evidence of law breaking than a simple blank piece of paper in his pocket. His historical analysis concerning the Founding Fathers is exagerated, if not outright faulty. Which begs the question, is this a case of academic dishonesty, intellectual laziness, or what I believe the case to be, a polemic from a Dmeocratic "minion" (To use his word) like any other. Had I known Harvard was not to concerned with issues of academic and intellectual honesty, I would have suggested they could have hired James Carville to do the same work.

"Sexual McCarthyism" is not a book. It is a publishing scam. The full-page New York Times ads with glowing comments by media celebrities and others made Dershowitz's new book sound like a timely and thoughtful analysis of the Clinton debacle. It is not. I hasten to add that I say this even though I agree with almost everything Dershowitz writes.

The book is not a real book, but merely a lightly edited compilation of op-eds and other columns Dershowitz has written over the last several years, some of which have almost nothing to do with the Clinton scandal. Almost all begin and end in 2 or 3 pages. The effect is as though one is reading an endless series of lawyerly proverbs. "Legal Chicken Soup for the Presidential Soul." Don't look for depth here. For example, Dershowitz does relatively little, given the title, to explicate the concept of "sexual mccarthyism."

Sure, Dershowitz is on the mark much of the time. But most of the material is out of date. And, to repeat the main point, this is a publishing rip-off. Make some fast money, then on to the next scandal.

Not persuasive. If you are already there, this book will confirm your prejudices. If not, you won't be swayed.

Perjury is perjury and there just ain't no getting around it. If you must buy this, buy Ann Coulter's better analysis from the other side of the spectrum and read both together.

I am convinced that there are two Dershowitzs -- the sometimes rational thinker and the biased, arrogant law professor. I got the book on the assumption that I would get the rational Dershowitz. Wrong. This is much of the same drivel you see in several of his other books and writings. Sexual McCarthyism is an intriguing concept but don't expect to learn much about it in this book. Keep your receipt, you'll want to throw this one back.

I thought this was an excellent case for the defense. It is a disjointed book, to be sure: a new 30-page introduction precedes a series of prior published articles. The result is that you find yourself going over familiar ground over & over. I understand this was necessary to get the book out in time for the impeachment trial (and to ward off claims of 20-20 hindsight). Still, it's a viewpoint worth reading about. There are plenty of books out with the other side - we can see Ann Coulter on any number of food fight talk shows (and absolving Richard Nixon in the process on the O'Reilly Factor). As much as I disliked Dershowitz during the OJ trial, this was a better effort.

Although its principles of organization can be a little confusing, this does not detract much from the fact this book is indispensable to anyone wishing elucidation on the confused issues surrounding the events of 1998. It is not for nothing that Dershowitz is Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law at Harvard. This very clearly presents points of law unknown to the layman, as well as explaining much in lawyerland which has not to do with law so much as tradition and accepted or unaccepted procedure, etc. Dershowitz's comparison of Starr's tactics to those of McCarthy and J. Edgar Hoover are not just absolutely valid, but should be obviously valid to anyone. Any decent American should be infuriated at these tactics, which dwarf anything Clinton may have done. Dershowitz's book is eminently fair, and the negative comments of some reviewers can only be explained by the fact, now obvious for some months, that there is a large minority of Americans who have decided to hate Clinton no matter what, as if their salvation depended upon it, and with no regard whatsoever for the dangers presented to me, you, and everyone, by Starr's vicious excesses, not to mention the just as vicious excesses of the extreme Republican Right, a crowd whose nasty behavior includes a thinly disguised but obvious white supremacist bent. Who are these folks who so proudly align themselves with these McCarthyites and racists?

I would reommend anything by Dershowitz if you can stand the arrogance and academic elitism that comes with this guy. Getting through all of that will help you undertand what he's really getting at here: that America is on the brink of a rigid politically correct morality that will destroy the very fabric that it has become known for: global icon of individualism, liberty and personal privacy. Gob help us if America becomes a petrified forest of superficial and hypocritical morality of extremist political interests. This guy's book needs to be read by all of us because God knows those who fail to understand historical repeat are doomed to cynical futures - forgive me. Signed by a naive Canadian (I suppose). How the hell could Americans impeach a President for that. Geez!

EVEN BETTER THAN THE O.J. BOOK. AN EXCELLENT ANALYSIS OF THE CLINTON SEX ISSUE AND THE RIGHT WINGED CONSERVATIVES. DERSHOWITZ EASY WRITING STYLE AND COMMAND OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW IS REFRESHING. IN THIS CASE I BELEIVE HE IS RIGHT IN STEP WITH THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

A "good read". I loved the book though at times the fact it was a dated essay, resulted in some repetition of thoughts.