Rating: 
Summary: Good writing, interesting theory...
Review: I have to admit that when I first picked up this book, I had my doubts. I thought to myself, "Great! Another Clinton--bashing, right--wing spectacle." Of course, I don't like to dismiss things so easily. Hence, I decided to take a chance on the book. "Dereliction of Duty" raises many interesting points on the Clinton administration. Some of them are plausible but I don't take them all as truth. I can't say they are lies, either. I'd much rather see it objectively as I continue reading books on the Clinton years. This book is a good point of reference but it doesn't cover the entire story. It makes interesting reading, though. It's also a quick read. If you want to kill off a couple hours, read this book.
Rating: 
Summary: Interesting Reading
Review: I am a liberal and Clinton supporter. I am always looking at both sides of the issue and will not be a hater or follower as many are. The only problem with this book are the inaccurracies. Bush sent troops to Somalia first. The downsizing of the military began with Reagan, then H. Bush. Clinton only finished the job in order to make the forces more streamline and efficient. I spent 22 years in the military during those anxious times. I personally think Clinton did a pretty good job with the military. George Bush took "Clintons Army" to Afganistain and Iraq. What do you think of their performance? Bush and his administration was briefed on Al Queida but they did not heed the warnings. So those are some of my problems with Mr. Pattersons book. But I recommend it for political reading by all.
Rating: 
Summary: Rating this book was a waste of a perfectly good star.
Review: The Lt. Colonel-author's book is published by the Regnery comp. that is devoted to philippics about Bill Clinton especially, and anything Democratic in general. The author had no particularly important administrative role to the Clinton foreign or military policy development other than tagging along with the president, but he seems to consider this chore as making him as knowledgeable as Kissinger, Dulles, or Gen. Marshall in knowing what decisions should be made. Facts were not much of a concern to this author. Never mind that Bush I began the Somalia affair, and the reduction of military. Or that the Republicans controlled the Congress and assisted in the reduction of the military bases under Clinton. Also, if it was so easy to get Bin Laden, then why after sending an entire army for him has the current president still not found the guy? And did I mention that the author was merely a tag along. I understand that he is planning a sequel on the mismanagement of McDonalds restaurant (hey, he buys happy meals, what more does he need to know). I didn't purchase the book, so Regnery made no money off me. But, I will consider a book by them on the revelations of the Clinton's White House gardener, or pastry chef when those books become available. I'll bet you that Bill once callously pulled a petal off a rose in the White House garden, and you can only imagine what he did with the custard from the White House eclairs!!
Rating:
Summary: Don't expect too much!
Review: This is one of the least substantive books I've read in recent years. It is, at best, sophomoric in its criticism of the Clinton White House, and, at worst, dangerous in attempting to assess "blame" without any real analysis. It is far too superficial to be taken too seriously. Additionally, I was bothered by Lt. Colonel Patterson's efforts to cloak himself in the mantle of the military volunteer, in "harm's way" in the interests of his fellow citizens. It looks to me, however, his was anything but a hardship career -- one relatively "cushy" job after another, his self-serving statements of sacrifice to the contrary notwithstanding. As far as military contributions are concerned, his appear to be very meager, or made at relatively low levels. We are, after all, reading here about the "observations" of an aide, not someone charged with policy-making responsibilities. The retrieval of Chelsea's backpack is hardly a strategic military contribution. Compare this record, say, to the real sacrifice made by the troops that came ashore at Iwo Jima (read "Flags of our Fathers", if you want to understand real military sacrifice) -- and you'll understand the difference. OK -- so the Vice President didn't say "hello" to him. Big deal. I'm also disappointed with what appears to me to be a breach of confidentiality -- an integrity issue, much the same as the lack of integrity so vociferously lamented by the author. If Patterson was so unhappy, he could easily have resigned or merely asked for reassignment. But, that would have required some courage and integrity on his part. Instead, he "toughed" it out long enough to wrangle another cushy assignment -- to the Air Force Academy. I'm reminded of Oscar Wilde's statement that "Duty is what one expects from others, it is not what one does oneself." I'm a retired military officer, and by no means an apologist for President Clinton. I understand very well the President's evident distain for the military, and for the severe impact it had on us as a nation. This was one of many regrettable things about his presidency. But, in sum, this book adds nothing new or even particularly meaningful to the continuing and important national discussion and debate concerning this particular President's legacy.
Rating:
Summary: Don't waste your money.
Review: Bold-face lies. A waste and a disgrace. Downright unpatriotic.
Rating:
Summary: Obviously Biased
Review: I read this expecting to find some meat and I was disappointed. How is the GOP going to win if we continue to aim obviously biased canards at Clinton. This book has so much obvious bias that it does not convince anyone--and I'm a Republican.
When the books about Bush are written, there will be problems with him too. But when you see bias in someone's argument, you just lose all faith in the accuracy of what he has written because you don't know what he omitted.
The paranoia of the Right is obvious and to me it's embarrassing as a member of the Right. It's like that Ann Coulter book--she does not convince a single person because her book is just dripping with anger and bias.
Rating: 
Summary: Indictment of Clinton
Review: Dereliction of Duty is,beyond a shadow of a doubt, the greatest indictment of the crimes and failures of the Clinton Administration. Col. Patterson raises many interesting points, examines each situation in a no-nonsense by the book manner. Even a die-hard Clinton lover would have to read this book and admit that Clinton was "derelict" in his duties as the President of The United States. I loved the book, loved its objectivity, and also enjoyed the characterization of Hillary Clinton, which few people know firsthand like the Colonel. Great Book!
Rating:
Summary: "Give Me A Break"
Review: Bill Clinton at his worst was better than George Bush at his best. To suggest that this fable has any grounding in fact is to negate the reality that Clinton was one of the most intellignet men to hold the office. There is plenty to critize re the Clinton administration, but this pulp fiction is not it. One wonders from whom did Patterson receive favors for this trash?
Rating:
Summary: good but not enough
Review: I enjoyed reading this book, but it had two main flaws: not enough content/depth and some unneeded editorializing. I believe that Patterson would have had more credibility if he hadn't on one hand said he had no ax to grind, then indulge in a lot of criticism that weren't necessary for his story. There were a few very interesting revelations in this book. Here are the main three that I found: 1. Clinton had several chances to get bin Laden and didn't do it because he looked at the terrorism threat in a law enforcement perspective, not war. 2. He was amazingly uncaring about the military in many ways, treating people badly, keeping important decisions hanging due to golf, and leaving behind the football one time just because he wanted to leave someplace right away. 3. He apologized to a female military official who complained of his groping her. This really makes Willey and others more credible. I am very anti-Clinton and a Republican partisan, but Patterson's account could have been filled out a bit more. I see this as kinda similar to Gary Aldrich's book: basically true, but the "potshots" make it a harder sell.
Rating:
Summary: A Book Every Citizen Should Read.
Review: This is an excellent book that every citizen should read. It was very depressing to find out these things went on. There has not been enough said about the revelations in this report.
| 
