Robert Scheer (1) (1936–)

While some people deride Robert Scheer for continually harping on the banks, he also tends to be right about them and the stranglehold they have on American and world societies. He does not go into much detail about the derivatives that led to the current financial crisis themselves, but rather how they were created and, more importantly, what legislation allowed their creation and trading.

One thing that was particularly refreshing about this book is how he does not favor one end of the show more political spectrum over the other. He places the blame squarely on the shoulders of both the Republicans AND the Democrats. In fact, he hammers the Clinton administration much more savagely than the Reagan administration. But not without good cause, as is detailed in the book. And he quite rightly expresses his extreme disappointment with the lack of financial reform under the current Obama administration.

Overall, it is a good book to read if you do not know much about how the current financial crisis came into being, and the answers are much simpler and straightforward than most of the financial regulators make it out to be. This book will get your blood boiling and make you want to start taking action to enact real regulatory reform. show less

Robert Scheer does a great job of tracing the roots of the current financial crisis. He starts during the Reagan administration, but this isn't a book that blames one party or the other. He spends a great deal of time castigating Clinton's cozy relationship with Wall Street, as well. Along the way, the author also draws attention to the few who predicted that deregulation would end in disaster. There's no doubt that it was the makers of the mess who benefited from the bailouts, while those show more who suffered because of their decisions were allowed to wallow in joblessness and looming foreclosure. It's a very sobering read, especially since, effectively, nothing has changed. show less

This is a collection of Scheer's interviews with and columns about presidents from Playboy and Los Angeles Times. Nixon & Reagan come across to me as wise and manipulative in the latter and gentler and more manipulated in the latter. More of a surprise to me as I recall a Reagan myth of goofy cowboy actor and drawing a straight line to senile befuddlement. Apparently, a shrewd operator acted betwixt. Nixon comes across more as Dubya to Kissinger's Karl Rove ... and who do we still have? show more Well, it is all thought-provoking these early, in-depth interviews with candidates campaigning for office. Carter squirming in his Playboy interview comes across as authentic and brave while Schneer commonly comes across as persnickety and needling. Clinton seems gracious to fawning and trying to get close to this left-wing scribe who seems coy and awed, both Bushes have the least revealing material and especially columns criticizing Bush (rightly in retrospect) for ignoring The Taliban, etc. seems to add nothing and only be here to move books. show less

An insightful, thought provoking collection of interviews and columns spanning the presidential terms of Nixon, Carter, Reagan, Clinton and Bush I and II. Scheer interviewed all but Bush II - and I wonder if his assessment of 'W' would have been even more negative if he had interviewed him as well.