In a book that has been raising hackles far and wide, the social critic Thomas Frank skewers one of the most sacred cows of the go-go '90s: the idea that the new free-market economy is good for everyone. Frank's target is "market populism"—the widely held belief that markets are a more democratic form of organization than democratically elected governments. Refuting the idea that billionaire CEOs are looking out for the interests of the little guy, he argues that "the great euphoria of the late nineties was never as much about the return of good times as it was the giddy triumph of one America over another." Frank is a latter-day Mencken, as readers of his journal The Baffler and his book The Conquest of Cool know. With incisive analysis, passionate advocacy, and razor-sharp wit, he asks where we are headed—and whether we're going to like it when we get there.

I can still feel the chills as I recall the scene on Fifth Avenue below the editor’s office in August 1997. This was really happening. Justice had prevailed. Two people were given their lives back because of the journalism by my team, the courage of our reporter and photographer. Now, their family was gathering in front of the building, holding copies of an EXTRA edition of The Herald-Dispatch that declared their freedom, holding signs and crying tears of gratitude. This was why, I was sure, the Founders had created the First Amendment. We had stood up to a foreign government and forced our own to do the right thing. Stories would not always end so elegantly. Justice and good journalism do not always win. There would be decades of frustration between moments of celebration. But this is a moment when journalism won. And it felt amazing.

Smart. Funny. Fearless."It's pretty safe to say that Spy was the most influential magazine of the 1980s. It might have remade New York's cultural landscape; it definitely changed the whole tone of magazine journalism. It was cruel, brilliant, beautifully written and perfectly designed, and feared by all. There's no magazine I know of that's so continually referenced, held up as a benchmark, and whose demise is so lamented" --Dave Eggers. "It's a piece of garbage" --Donald Trump.

The men who served with in the 1st Infantry Division with F company, 52nd Infantry, (LRP) later redesignated as Company I, 75th Infantry (Ranger) --engaged in some of the fiercest, bloodiest fighting during the Vietnam War, suffering a greater relative aggregate of casualties that any other LRRP/LRP/ Ranger company. Their base was Lai Khe, within hailing distance of the Vietcong central headquarters, a mile inside Cambodia, with its vast stockpiles of weapons and thousands of transient VC and NVA soldiers. Recondo-qualified Bill Goshen was there, and has written the first account of these battle-hardened soldiers. As the eyes and ears of the Big Red One, the 1st Infantry, these hunter/killer teams of only six men instered deep inside enemy territory had to survive by their wits, or suffer the deadly consequences. Goshen himself barely escaped with his life in a virtual suicide mission that destroyed half his team. His gripping narrative recaptures the raw courage and sacrifice of American soldiers fighting a savage war of survival: men of all colors, from all walks of life, warriors bonded by triumph and tragedy, by life and death. They served proudly in Vietnam, and their stories need to be told.

This book is a voter's-eye view of the 1992 presidential election campaign. Robert D. Loevy traveled from state to state throughout the 1992 presidential selection process--from the pre-primary period through election day--studying the candidates and the various techniques they used to win votes and outwit their opponents. As he made his way from one political rally to another, and watched one political commercial after another, Loevy had two main questions in mind: Is this process fair to the candidates who are running and the people who are making up their minds about whom to vote for? And does this process treat the voters of each state equally? This book catches the flavor and excitement of the 1992 presidential election while at the same time pointing out flaws in the process--a haphazard calendar of presidential primaries, a national nominating convention that no longer nominates, and an Electoral College that distorts each state's relative impact, to name a few--that make it essentially unequal in nature. Loevy proposes realistic and achievable reforms for each of the flaws described.