Rating: 
Summary: This guy may be a commie
Review: Starting with McCarthy it is evident that the author has an unrelentless bias. Firstly, Mcarthy is called a drunk who lied about his war record. Mcarthy did drink heavily in his later years, but as far as lying about the 11 combat misssions he did in fact fly after volunteering for the Marines it could be said that he may have embelished slightly. Anyone who knows a war veteran knows that embelishing there expieriences is almost a requirement, my Great grandfater who was a WW1 and 2 vet and lived to be 110 did his fair share of embelishing. And of course this biased pinko tends not to bring up any of the mass amounts of evidence such as the soviet cables and vinona files that have proven Mcarthys accusations. This is just the tip of the iceberg with this new york times liberal who goes on to slander great events and presidents in history , and gives his boy Clinton a slight thumping on his affair with monica, while not mentioning his 87 days of bombing the Balkans or that he bombed an apsirin factory in the sudan to take the heat off his impeachment. If you want to give this book a better name I recomend , "dont know much about revisionist liberal failed marxist opininated history"
Rating: 
Summary: Style: 10 Content: ?
Review: I was really enjoying this book - learning a great deal in an enjoyable way - until I got to the twentieth century. Then I detected a viewpoint creeping in. Then I got to the section on Ronald Reagan - four pages on Iran-Contra and, oh by the way, the cold war ended. I would hate to think that history will remember Reagan in this proportion.
Now, unfortunately, I have to take the rest of the book with a grain of salt.
I must note I read the original version published in 1995 so Davis may have improved this portion of the text. But based on the comments below, I doubt it.
Rating:
Summary: Make sure to consult an encyclopedia as you read this book
Review: One question:
What good results from reading an "interesting" history book that confuses facts and opinions?One opinion:
If you like historical opinion, buy a book by an author who writes historical fiction or acknowledges he is biased. One solution:
The encyclopedia will help you separate established facts from Davis's opinions. Here are a few corrections for those who read this book. 1. Washington did not nudge Henry Knox with the tip of his boot as he stepped into his boat to cross the Delaware. Knox did not travel in the same boat as George Washington. Knox was in charge of transporting the horses and artillery on the big ferry boats. 2. Most of the men crossed the Delaware standing up. Big river ferries and freight boats (Durham boats) had few seats or none at all. If a man sat on the bottom of one of those boats in the winter he would have been sitting in ice water. I got these facts from "Washington's Crossing," by David Hackett Fischer.
Rating:
Summary: WK Folsom California
Review: If you want a politically correct view of history this is it. Accuracy is secondary. History with a left wing bias.
Rating: 
Summary: Good, Well-Narrated Overview of American History
Review: The author boldly states in his pre-amble that the reason most Americans don't know much about their own history is primarily twofold -- first, that schools cut out much of what is "bad" in our history, and second, that schools make history dull. This series goes a long way toward overcoming the first short-coming of school history by presenting both the heroic and not-so-heroic moments in the history of our country. On the second point, it makes a little headway, but not enough. One of my great objections to the study of history in school was always that it involved the rote memorization of dates, place names and events, without any real analysis or context. Here, everything is set in a context that gives the dates and names meaning, but it is impossible to give even an overview of 200 years of history in 22 hours without lists of names, places and dates, and there is still plenty of that here. In addition, Davis goes a little too far in trying to rectify the often candy-coated view of history, thus spending an awful lot of time on the United States' mistreatment of native Americans and African Americans (referred to as Indians and blacks in the book), while giving short shrift to science and culture and barely touching on such things as the extent to which the U.S. government was aware of the Nazis' treatment of jews during World War II. All that said, one of the joys of this series is Dick Estell's excellent narration, which gives life to even the dullest of passages. It is also refreshing to finally be able to hear about the more human side of history, or at least the more human side of our presidents and other political leaders as well as the leading men of industry. There is an attempt, as well, to incorporate culture and art into the narrative, although some of that comes off as particularly disjointed and not sufficiently tied to the main narrative, especially since there is almost no discussion of how average Americans lived at any point in history, besides incidental references to tenements and general statements about the plight of immigrants and the poor. One can certainly also quibble with the choice of events in recent history, although to be fair, there has not been adequate time for any historian to deal with the events of September 11th or the Clinton presidency. Davis tries very hard to be even-handed in his treatment of the various political parties, although his disdain for the treatment of minorities throughout U.S. history tends to come off somewhat on the liberal side, a view that is offset, however, by his almost entirely negative report of the Clinton presidency. In spite of the book's shortcomings, however, this is a wonderful overview of the defining events in U.S. history, with a nice selection of recommendations for more in-depth reading, as well as a good selection of "American Voices," quotes from real life participants in the events reveiwed. All in all, for those who, like me, don't have a comprehensive knowledge of American history, this is an excellent starting place and is great company on the road. I will definitely be listening to this one again to pick up things that didn't really sink in the first time around, since a lot is covered here.
Rating: 
Summary: worth reading
Review: Throughout the book there are a number of must reads listed which give you a place to look if a particular topic interested you enough to want to read more. There are very few books that attempt to cover such a wide span of history in one volume with such attention to keeping the reader interested. Davies' Europe: A history is one notable exception. I listened to the book via audible.com download -- a format I would highly recommend.
Rating:
Summary: What color is your history?
Review: History is in the eye of the beholder, and Davis views it through the lens of a liberal. There is nothing wrong with that, except that he espouses to present an objective, unbiased view of our nation's past. Perhaps this is an impossible goal, but he should at least be congniscent of this. It is difficult to cover the entire nation's history in the span of a few hours, but the periods he chose to explore, and the viewpoints he chose to represent, will leave the the unskeptical reader leaning to the left. If you want an entertaining perspective on history, this certainly fits. But please don't use this as a substitute for real history books. I would strongl recommend _Don't Know Much About the Universe_ over this.
Rating:
Summary: Loved It
Review: Like many people, to me, history has always been one of those boring subjects they try to teach you in school when all you care about is the present and the future. Only as you get older do you start to look to the past. It's a natural thing...we look to the past as a way to keep ourselves young. Life is so challenging and complex as an adult -- especially now, in this fast-paced technological age -- that we look to the simpler times of the past as a way to get away from the frustrations of the present. I came across this book and just absolutely love it. The flap copy is true -- this book is not written in the boring textbook style that was shoved down our throats in school. It focuses on key moments, events, and names from American history and teaches is about them in a simple, easy-to-read, easy-to-understand style. There have been so many names of people and incidents that I have heard mentioned throughout my life but have never really known about. I have now learned so much from this book and I just want more!
Rating:
Summary: Makes History Interesting!
Review: Don't Know Much About History: Everything You Need to Know About American History but Never Learned by Kenneth C. Davis was recently revised to include the Clinton scandals, the 2000 election, and the events of September 11, 2001. The book is a fabulous, enjoyable discussion of history that brings it alive and makes it as fun and interesting as any novel. I recommend it highly. My two complaints are these. First, the discussion of the most recent events in the book lack the historical perspective necessary to view them objectively. This is particularly true of the events of September 11. My second complaint is this. Davis claims that the Perot candidacy in 1992 helped Bill Clinton to defeat George Bush, the elder, and may have been responsible for Clinton's victory. This is not my recollection of what happened. The way I remember it, Perot dropped out of the race during the Democratic National Convention. The democrats made a huge appeal to Perot voters during the convention, and gained the lead over Bush at this time, never to lose it again. When Perot re-joined the race, polls showed that he siphoned votes from Clinton, by more than two to one, over Bush, and this was presumably the case during the general election. No doubt, the timing of Perot's dropping out of the race was helpful to the Democrats. But ultimately, the success of his candidacy was more a testament to the strength of anti-Bush sentiment than it was a boon to Clinton. I say this, in such detail, not because I want to make such a fuss about this particular issue. Rather, it is because it makes me wonder, if he might be wrong about this, how many things is Davis wrong about that I don't remember from my lifetime, and for which I'm taking his word? I especially wonder this about things that are still politically charged, such as the Vietnam War and Watergate. But still, it's a really wonderful, great book.
Rating: 
Summary: Interesting, Although Clearly Not Objective
Review: The author provides an interesting survey of American History up to and including the mid 1990s. He freely passes into and out of editorial mode, especially when it comes to the recent past. By the time I finished the book, there was very little question as to Mr. Davis' personal political views.
| 
