Rating: 
Summary: Brock has the Facts Wrong
Review: Throughout his book David Brock claims that Vincent Foster committed suicide. On page 205 he trashed a very nice man and a grand jury witness named Patrick Knowlton.Mr. Knowlton was the first of many witnesses that noticed Foster's car was not present at the crime scene where Mr. Foster's body was found. The U.S. government and American press have claimed Foster drove to the scene in his car. Brock dismissed the key witness Patrick Knowlton in his book by saying he was a "discredited witness" because he was harassed by a organized team of FBI thugs on the streets of Washington after he was subpoenaed to testify. By pretending the harassment of Mr. Knowlton never happened David Brock smears a witness that came forward to tell the truth and at the same time joined in the cover up of a murder. David Brock attempted to make Mr. Knowlton look like a nut. Brock has ignored the fact that the Special Division of the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Knowlton ...and ordered evidence of the witness intimidation to be included in Kenneth Starr's cover-up Report of Foster's murder. Brock is apparently ignorant of an internal Independent Counsel memorandum obtained by Accuracy in Media through a Freedom of Information lawsuit last year. That memorandum discussed the harassment of Patrick Knowlton on the streets of Washington. Blinded by the Right is among a long list of bestselling books by well known authors including, Ann Coulter, Gary Aldrich, Helen Thomas, David Broder, Bob Woodward and others that repeat the official lie that Vincent Foster committed suicide. The treatment of Patrick Knowlton by Mr. Brock demonstrates that David Brock is a person that lacks integrity.
Rating: 
Summary: Not for the Faint of heart
Review: Brock's searing tell all/maifesto is a searing look at the Right wing and their movement to mold political discourse, media content and political process to reflect their twisted mental ideologies. Anyone who would like to undestand the epicenters of right wing power and the rise of alternately foppish and frightening figures like Paul Weyreich, Newt Gingrich and even Trent Lott should consider this a manual. In some ways, this book gave me hope and faith in the Progressive and Democratic movement, who refuse to adopt the vile character assasination tactics and outright distortions that have become the Republican Party's tools of the trade. The section on Anita Hill and the time of Iran Contra is especially hard to read-- again, Brock's stories are just to bizarre to be discounted. His amazing ability to explain and recall names and connections provides plenty of credibility to this tome. I can only hope that, prodded by this book and others that will undoubtedly follow, the American public will finally open their eyes to the excesses, hypocrisy and subversions of justice committed by Gingrich, Ralph Reed, Olson and even poster boy Ronald Reagan. Brock unveils the dichotomy between their quest to break down privacy protections, environmental regulations, social safety nets, separation of church and state and judicial restraint in order to create an oligarchy where the moral codes are set-- but not practiced-- by a few self-appointed interests. I can only hope that after this book is read by progressives and conservatives alike, we are inspired to take back our country from those who seek to destroy its very traditions of life , liberty and equality. Brock's book dos not make up for his efforts to destroy Anita Hill and the Clintons, but it does expose the players in a particularly ugly chapter in American History. As those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it, I hope our society, and others like David Brock, can learn from his shameful legacy. I wish this book was easy t dismiss or uncompelling to read. Unfortunately,it is all to asy to read, and to believe.
Rating: 
Summary: The truth at last!!
Review: Many of us who lived through all this knew there was more to the story behind the scenes and it is nice to finally get the truth. Written from the viewpoint of someone who was there, history can be filled out. Now we can see the people who were there and what they really thought about what they were doing.
Rating:
Summary: Confirms your worst assumptions
Review: NOTE: the reviews of this book will be basically 1 star and 5 stars. Hmmmm.... I didn't give this 5 stars because of its literary value: it was because in it one of the spin-doctors of the GOP spills his guts about what actually goes on in the high-minded Heritage Foundation et al. No surprises to any thinking independent or Democratic readers but it will confirm your worse assumptions about what the angry Kulturkampf warriors want. They were [mad] off at Bush senior and Baker so you can imagine what Clinton did to their digestions. The little tidbits are priceless too. E.g., how one of the GOP media guys figured that most of Limbaugh's listeners didn't read much so don't bother trying to target a book to them...
Rating:
Summary: No surprises. And yet...
Review: Great fun. Even allowing the least favorable view of Brock as a journalist and human being there isn't a shred of doubt that what he's reporting here is accurate. In the negative reviews here and elsewhere (see David Horowitz) you will find very few challenges on the facts. Instead the attacks are personal proving Brock's point that the right has completely lost interest in making reasonable arguments or forgotten how. What you're left with is a view into a world you knew existed and yet, seeing it laid out like this, you can still be surprised by.
Rating:
Summary: Confirms what I always suspected
Review: David Brock's expose of the New Right confirms what I always thought was true of the "movement" as he calls it: Modern conservatism is a bankrupt and utterly destructive system of non-ideas that could never withstand the light of day. The only way the neocons can advance is through negative attacks, innuendo, lies and, ultimately, stealing elections. The sad fact is that this cabal of right wing lawyers, writers and political hack/operatives are finally in power as Brock points out at the end of his book. These folks don't create or accomplish anything...they simply form conservative think tanks and watchdog groups funded by Richard Mellon Scaife to spread their political excrement. They have all the money in the world but no class.
Rating:
Summary: True or False?
Review: It's not hard to understand why David Brock is not a very sympathetic figure to many--including most conservatives. He presents himself after all, as a perpetual victim of his personal and political circumstances, a "devil-made me-do-it" liberal then conservative hack , an ideological convert with a incurable revisionist perspective on recent historical events and personalities. It's also not surprising to find that others, especially those of a more liberal persuasion, consider David Brock as a political prodigal son whom they have recently welcomed back to the liberal home he abandoned after college now that he has repudiated his conservative past and has been reconverted to a belief in the liberal creed. What is dismaying is that the first group summarily dismisses the allegations in this book as totally without merit or worthy of consideration and the second group unquestioningly accepts every allegation on face value. There are many specific allegations in this book...some involving influential parties and leaders in government, business and in the publishing industry. More objective and credible analysts should check them out. This book could serve a useful purpose if it occasions a close scrutiny of the divisive, divergent reading Americans have on the events of the last 15 years or so portrayed in it. The results of this analysis could lower or raise my rating of the book.
Rating: 
Summary: The Slings And Arrows Of Outrageous Disillusionment
Review: ...That which makes this book of such interest to me is NOT its "revelations" of Mr. Brock's supposed "Sins" upon the behalf the so-called: "Conservative Cause"--The issue of Clarence Thomas is NOT his reputed "sexual harrassment" of the neurotically hyper-senisitive Anita Hill, but that, regardless his political ideology and personal conduct, he is a manifestly inferior jurist--but its depiction of Mr. Brock's ideological disillusionment...Indeed, that which makes this book truly interesting is is its self-relevatory depiction of the classic male "Mid-life Crisis" of disillusionmenet/disappointment in a person who has yet to pass the middle of his life (Is Mr. Brock a hypocrite?: Certainly--But only to the extent that the unfortunate vicissitudes of human nature inevitably render ALL adamant adherents of ANY rigorous ideology into hypocrites). And one of the most interesting aspects of this book--And all others of its kind--is the strange narcissistic presentation by Mr. Brock of the supposed "uniqueness" of his disillusioning experience; as if he were the ONLY person to have EVER suffered the exquiste torment of an ideological disillusionment (With regrets to Mr. Brock--And to Mr. Horowitz and to all others of their kind--William Jennings Bryan {1860-1925} has you beaten by eighty years!).
Regretably, while this book is interesting--I ALWAYS enjoy watching young ideologues of ANY category being hoisted upon their own petards--it is NOT the equal of thost twin classics of recent ideological disillusionment: William Greider's THE EDUCATION OF DAVID STOCKMAN (In which a man's disillusionment is chronicled WHILE it is happening), and David Stockman's own: THE TRIUMPH OF POLITICS (In which the man indicated that he LEARNED something from his disillusionment). But that which I find to be of such annoyance in this book--and many others of its kind--is not Mr. Brock's From-Right-To-Left conversion--Or the From-Left-To-Right conversion manifested by his counterpart Mr. David Horowitz--but that BOTH Mr. Brock and Mr. Horowitz have in their mirror-image disillusionments, NOT taken the senisible course and abandoned ideology altogether...
Rating:
Summary: eyes opened to "The Right", will he close them to "The Left"
Review: Grades are so contrived: I don't want to be one of those who rates a book simply on the basis of how much it validates my perspective. I happen to be a liberal (I think that a lot of people misunderstand the intended meaning of that word. I'd expand on this, but I don't my write-up to run on for too long). I am critical of the Christian Coalition and The Washington Times - so the book does "speak" to me; but, besides that, this is a great read. It is not just Brock's personal story, but a collection of consice portraits that reveal interesting aspects of the eccentrics, idealogues, intellectuals and shrewd tacticians who Brock came across when working for Insight magazine, and then The American Spectator. Previous reveiwers suggest a suspicious link between Brock's coming out as a gay man and the time he chose to remove himself from the crowd he writes about. They seem to point it to oversensitivity or opportunism on his part - weren't they paying attention?. To someone who hasn't read the book, it may seem that he is coming out just now. He has become more public about his gayness due to the writing and release of this book, which is, after all, partly a memoir where his personal aspects play a considerable role. Brock was openly gay as a student at Berekely, and at the same time, disclosed his homosexuality to his parents. After college, he did become cloistered about his orientation - sensitive to the fact that many of his co-workers were strongly opposed or morally judgemental about the subject; and yet, even then, according to the book, there was almost a small subculture of gays amidst this ultra-consevative group of journalists and strategists. He may now consider being gay and working for right-wing causes incompatible, but those two aspects of himself had been parallel for some time. Another suggestion is that Brock is not trustworthy because of his fickle "switching" of political camps What is intially wrong with going from considering yourself conservative to considering yourself liberal, or vice versa? Reconsidering one's opinions and beliefs can be healthy. Even beyond our 20s, many of us are searching and redefining our values and ideas of who we are. Self-discovery can be a long growing process. It's obviously something different when one irratically changes their mind or becomes too caught up in whims when making decisions. I, however, believe that the book gives valid reasons for the apparant changes in Brock's outlook. Compounded to that is the suggestion that Brock abandoned his principles because he calcalatedly saw it as finaincally lucrutave to go to the other side. Yes, he is making money from his book. He is a professional writer; that is: someone who is able to make a living by one's writing abilities. If Brock had continued with the Spectator, and kept on towing the line there, he could of easily written a book then that would of been published by Regnery Press, whose offerings (such as "Bias", "Hell to Pay", and "Shakedown") are heavily promoted by Matt Drudge and often purchased by clubs and organizations in bulk, putting them in the top 10 of Amazon and The New York Times bestsellers before they are even released. My hope is that Brock is now becoming a reasonably independent thinker, and not a knee-jerk defender of public figures associated with Liberals or the Democratic party. I wouldn't want him to be something of a mirror image to ex-New-Leftist David Horowitz; that is, constantly viewing the world in a Left-Right dichatomy, co-opting desired traits for "his team" and projecting anything seen as a foible or sin on the "opponents" that he claims special insight to. The book Brock wrote is about a powerful, core group of ideologists who encouraged each other's fanatic bent. It is not necessarily an attack on anyone who happens to be conservative or think of themselves as such. Outside of strategic thinktanks, people aren't often so confined to preconceived political ideologies. Many people consider themselves conservatives because they hold values like honesty, integrity of character, and playing by precendented rules in order to succeed - values that the group Brock exposes might of preached, but didn't seem to extol on a regular basis. If Brock deliberatly falsified his reports about Anita Hill and Troopergate is he credible now? Many pundits are pushing the formula of "if he lied then, he's lying now"; but they often add, just a few short breathes away, that what he "lied about then" was really the truth, and he's only really lying now. To his credit, I have heard Brock speaking to the question of his own credibility and agreeing that it is valid issue to raise. It is one of his intentions to impress the reader that he is now sincere. I hope he is - not just for my gratification, but for the sake of the author's abstract component that is mentioned in the extended title of his book.
Rating:
Summary: Whoa, Nelly
Review: Oh dear me. An excellent if sometimes gossipy and unevenly written look at the inner workings of a poisonous cabal. Brock damns himself as much as his former associates, quite consciously and thoroughly. He's a brave man. As more and more information emerges in the form of Robert Ray's final reports surrounding the Lewinsky and Whitewater investigations, this book helps chart why they started and what they really meant. Another reviewer has mentioned that Brock was confronted on TV with "facts" he couldn't "refute," yet does not identify the show or the interviewer. My suggestion: said reviewer is tainted by a particular bias, and really needs to read what the Ray report DID say about Willey (hint: it's not very nice if you read it carefully).
| 
