Presidents Body Counts

peak No Evil About Presidents. So say most textbooks, journalists, commentators, and even some historians. Not in this book.An eye opening look at all the evil done by presidents, mass murder, incompetence, and terrorism, and a look at the noblest presidents also.How many of these do you know?-Two presidents ordered genocide, and another collaborated with genocide.-Four presidents ordered chemical warfare. One ordered atomic warfare.-Two presidents pardoned mass murderers, one a war criminal who murdered women and children, the other a terrorist who blew up a plane.-At least four presidents ignored genocide. In one case he could have saved up to over a million lives.-Two other presidents, besides Bush, ordered the mass torture of prisoners.-Two living presidents may face war crimes trials.-One president ran for office as the candidate for terrorists.-Two presidents were members of the KKK, one of them initiated in the White House.-One president was so incompetent, the White House was burned down by the enemy.-One president holds the record for the most invasions of Latin America. Two other presidents are the only ones in the last 120 years to not try to overthrow governments in Latin America.-Four presidents strongly despised by many were actually our greatest presidents.-America's greatest president may have saved over a million lives. -America's greatest ex-president saved even more lives than that. He also helped bring democracy to 25 nations.-America's second greatest president headed off genocide, and prevented two wars.-For almost every evil president, there were far better men who might have won the election.-For almost every good president, there were also far worse men (and women) who could have won.The most insightful and damning expose of the presidency you will ever see. By a historian and professor, lively and not pulling any punches.

Sean Strub arrived in Washington, D.C. in 1976 harbouring a terrifying secret: his attraction to men. As Strub explored the capital's political and social circles, he discovered a parallel world where powerful men lived double lives shrouded in shame. When the AIDS epidemic hit in the early '80s, Strub turned to activism to combat discrimination and demand research. Strub takes readers through his own diagnosis and inside ACT UP, the activist organisation that transformed a stigmatised cause into one of the defining political movements of our time.

While presidents have always kept a watchful eye on the military, our generals have been equally vigilant in assessing the commander-in-chief. Their views, however, have been relatively neglected in the literature on civil-military relations. By taking us inside the military's mind in this matter, Dale Herspring's new book provides a path-breaking, utterly candid, and much-needed reassessment of a key relationship in American government and foreign policymaking. As Herspring reminds us, that relationship has often been a very tense, even extremely antagonistic one, partly because the military has become a highly organized and very effective bureaucratic interest group. Reevaluating twelve presidents-from Franklin D. Roosevelt to George W. Bush-Herspring shows how the intensity of that conflict depends largely on the military's perception of the president's leadership style. Quite simply, presidents who show genuine respect for military culture are much more likely to develop effective relations with the military than those who don't. Each chapter focuses on one president and his key administrators--such as Robert McNamara, Henry Kissinger, and Donald Rumsfeld-and contains case studies showing how the military reacted to the president's leadership. In the final chapter, Herspring ranks the presidents according to their degree of conflict with the military: Lyndon Johnson received exceedingly low marks for being overbearing and dismissive of the armed forces, further aggravating his Vietnam problem. George H. W. Bush inspired respect for not micromanaging military affairs. And Bill Clinton was savaged both privately and publicly by military leaders for having been a "draft dodger," cutting Pentagon spending, and giving the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" tag an unnecessarily high profile. From World War II to Operation Iraqi Freedom, Herspring clearly shows how the nature of civilian control has changed during the past half century. He also reveals how the military has become a powerful bureaucratic interest group very much like others in Washington-increasingly politicized, media-savvy, and as much accountable to Congress as to the commander-in-chief. Ultimately, The Pentagon and the Presidency illuminates how our leaders devise strategies for dealing with threats to our national security-and how the success of that process depends so much upon who's in charge and how that person's perceived by our military commanders.

In 2008, when the U.S. National Intelligence Council issued its latest report meant for the administration of newly elected President Barack Obama, it predicted that the planet's "sole superpower" would suffer a modest decline and a soft landing fifteen years hence. In his new book The United States of Fear, Tom Engelhardt makes clear that Americans should don their crash helmets and buckle their seat belts, because the United States is on the path to a major decline at a startling speed. Engelhardt offers a savage anatomy of how successive administrations in Washington took the "Soviet path"--pouring American treasure into the military, war, and national security--and so helped drive their country off the nearest cliff. This is the startling tale of how fear was profitably shot into the national bloodstream, how the country--gripped by terror fantasies--was locked down, and how a brain-dead Washington elite fiddled (and profited) while America quietly burned. Think of it as the story of how the Cold War really ended, with the triumphalist "sole superpower" of 1991 heading slowly for the same exit through which the Soviet Union left the stage twenty years earlier.

At least 200,000-250,000 people died in the war in Bosnia. "There are three million child soldiers in Africa." "More than 650,000 civilians have been killed as a result of the U.S. occupation of Iraq." "Between 600,000 and 800,000 women are trafficked across borders every year." "Money laundering represents as much as 10 percent of global GDP." "Internet child porn is a $20 billion-a-year industry." These are big, attention-grabbing numbers, frequently used in policy debates and media reporting. Peter Andreas and Kelly M. Greenhill see only one problem: these numbers are probably false. Their continued use and abuse reflect a much larger and troubling pattern: policymakers and the media naively or deliberately accept highly politicized and questionable statistical claims about activities that are extremely difficult to measure. As a result, we too often become trapped by these mythical numbers, with perverse and counterproductive consequences. This problem exists in myriad policy realms. But it is particularly pronounced in statistics related to the politically charged realms of global crime and conflict-numbers of people killed in massacres and during genocides, the size of refugee flows, the magnitude of the illicit global trade in drugs and human beings, and so on. In Sex, Drugs, and Body Counts, political scientists, anthropologists, sociologists, and policy analysts critically examine the murky origins of some of these statistics and trace their remarkable proliferation. They also assess the standard metrics used to evaluate policy effectiveness in combating problems such as terrorist financing, sex trafficking, and the drug trade.

On Ice-T's 1991 classic O.G. Original Gangster, he introduced his all-Black hardcore band Body Count with lead guitarist Ernie C, bringing them on the first-ever Lollapalooza tour that summer. The next year, Body Count's self-titled debut album, rounded out by rhythm guitarist D-Roc the Executioner, bassist Mooseman, and drummer Beatmaster V, made them the most incendiary band in the world, confronting white supremacy and police brutality with pulverizing songs that shattered musical boundaries. Body Count's rage and shock humor sparked nationwide protests and boycotts, including death threats, censure from the federal government, a spot on the FBI National Threat list, and a denunciation by the President of the United States. The album was removed from stores and remains banned to this day, but decades later Body Count are performing to their biggest audiences and greatest acclaim, pulling off one of the most remarkable comebacks in punk or metal history. Drawn from years of research and dozens of new interviews, this is the story of a band of high school friends who revolutionized modern music, brought explosive live performances, and raised questions America's lawmakers didn't want to answer, overcoming some of the country's most powerful forces to reshape the world's cultural conversation.

The Presidency in the Era of 24-Hour News examines how changes in the news media since the golden age of television--when three major networks held a near monopoly on the news people saw in the United States--have altered the way presidents communicate with the public and garner popular support. How did Bill Clinton manage to maintain high approval ratings during the Monica Lewinsky scandal? Why has the Iraq war mired George Bush in the lowest approval ratings of his presidency? Jeffrey Cohen reveals how the decline of government regulation and the growth of Internet and cable news outlets have made news organizations more competitive, resulting in decreased coverage of the president in the traditional news media and an increasingly negative tone in the coverage that does occur. He traces the dwindling of public trust in the news and shows how people pay less attention to it than they once did. Cohen argues that the news media's influence over public opinion has decreased considerably as a result, and so has the president's ability to influence the public through the news media. This has prompted a sea change in presidential leadership style. Engaging the public less to mobilize broad support, presidents increasingly cultivate special-interest groups that often already back the White House's agenda. This book carries far-reaching implications for the future of presidential governance and American democracy in the era of new media.