Not so much a sequel to The Talisman..., June 28, 2002

I'd give it 3 1/2 stars.

If you are looking for a novel in the same vein as The Talisman you may be disappointed. A couple of characters return and some of the mystical and bright imagery reappears from time to time, but this book is much darker and actually ties in better with the universe of the Crimson King/Roland of Gilead than to the Territories of The Talisman (which make only brief appearances).

The book is also written in a conversational (and occasionally flippant) first person/invisible observer style that can be off-putting, particularly as it does not enhance the story itself. Nevertheless, those who persevere will find the type of story for which these authors are known: colorful characters, potent imagery (the blackest blacks, the whitest whites) and a battle between the forces of good and evil.

Jack Sawyer, the hero from The Talisman, returns to take up the battle anew - and, as it happens, regain the memories long-suppressed of the events in the earlier novel. He is nearly unique among the heroes in the Steven King universe in that he is not suffering from some gargantuan character flaw that must be overcome. He's a genuinely good guy who still retains some of the innocence of the boy of twelve that crossed a continent (on two worlds) to save his mother.

He enlists a handful of friends to go and face the forces of evil together (a la The Stand - the Nick/Henry parallels are just too much). Those forces include minions of the Crimson King (hence the Dark Tower reference), a crow (as in The Stand again or, perhaps, The Dark Half) and a serial killer.

Anything more would be telling. It's a worthwhile read so long as you approach it, not as a sequel, but as a separate work entirely.

Insight for those who wish to be free, June 13, 2002

Given the nature of the subject matter and the expertise of the author, the writing can be dry and may appear difficult to approach, particularly in the initial chapters, but the reader who sticks with it will be well rewarded. Subsequent chapters, largely adapted from lectures by the author, are easier reads. And Friedman avoids, for the most part, the economic jargon that can make works such as this hopelessly confusing to the layman.

Friedman is often tagged with the "monetarist" or "supply-side" labels (if you don't believe me, read some of the other reviews), largely because he believes that these methods of economic manipulation are infinitely preferable to the fiscal manipulation that has been the norm in this country. Those who actually READ this book will find that he advocates intervention by neither means, preferring instead stable monetary growth removed from the hands of either fiscal or monetary interventionists.

He provides one of the most succinct explanations of the monetary actions (of the Fed) that created and worsened the Great Depression that I have ever come across, though mentioning only briefly the fiscal policies that subsequently lengthened it considerably: the New Deal and, to a much lesser extent, Smoot-Hawley. This alone makes the work valuable.

He goes on to examine a number of things that are now taken for granted in this country (the Welfare State, Social Security, public education, licensing requirements) and asks the question, "Have these government actions made things better or worse?" The record is less than stellar (especially in the subsequent 40 years since this was written). And he proposes some alternatives such as the negative income tax and other alternative roles for government that are, arguably, less intrusive on the liberty of the citizenry.

And he uses examples that are easy to follow and understand including one about men stranded on desert isles that is NOT as presented in another review.

As an economist, I would say that this work has aged remarkably well. The analysis has clearly not become dated as have those of Galbraith and, to a certain extent Keynes. [Keynes WAS a genius, providing the mathematical and econometric bases for much of current economic thought, but, contrary to the assertion by another reviewer, much of what he proposed should be done by the state has been discredited.] Friedman, for example, was one of the first to advocate a school voucher system, which is only now receiving serious attention.

It is noteworthy that a number of economists from the left have criticized Friedman in general and this work in particular. But those attacks (by Krugman, Herman and Diesing, among others) have proven to be, for the most part, without merit.

If you accept the basic premise that freedom is vitally important and that the actions of the state should be viewed from that point of view, you will find this work to be invaluable. If not, you will certainly not be pleased. And if you believe the utter nonsense that capitalism is in any way "oppressive", well, if you can't see reality...

Heart Wrenching, June 10, 2002

... The story told here is an honest one about brothers in arms who went where their country sent them and did what they were asked to do. The message is not dissimilar to that seen in many WWII movies but severely lacking in movies about this conflict which seem to find more "truth" in such movies as "Platoon". While that, too, is a great film, it must be remembered that the acts portrayed in it were the exception, rather than the rule.

"We Were Soldiers" examines the first battles of the Ia Drang Valley in 1965. Col. Hal Moore (Mel Gibson) and a force of some 400 men defend a vulnerable position from attack by as many as 4,000 North Vietnamese entrenched in the surrounding mountains. The tactics, the motivations, the emotions and, ultimately, the terrible cost are examined through the eyes of Moore, his top Sergeant (played flawlessly by Sam Elliot), Moore's wife (Madeleine Stowe), an intrepid chopper pilot (Greg Kinnear) and a photojournalist (Barry Pepper).

The battle scenes are realistic - though not quite as harrowing as "Black Hawk Down" - and the characters are more clearly drawn than in that film.

Overall, this is an excellent look at true heroism and moral conviction in the face of adversity and almost overwhelming odds.