I have finished History of the American People by Paul Johnson. Definitly more entertaining than a lot of things I've read on American History.

The author's bias is evident throughout the book. As I stated in an earlier post, he makes the case in several parts of the book for our country founded on christian values. With this in mind, he is true to form of the standard christian conservative mindset. His support for the political parties switches right around the time that party values most obviously change, so that his support of Democratic figures early in the nation's history wanes right around the Truman/Eisenhower transition. After that he has nothing good to say about a Democrat, and his support of Republican figures thereafter wanes not even for Nixon, for whom he makes many excuses.

An example of this bias is blatant with his attempt to portray Eisenhower as an upstanding christian in the American tradition.

Eisenhower presided benignly over what was termed `Piety on the Potomac', a generalized form of the Christian religion very much in the American tradition, with no stress on dogma but insistence on moral propriety and good works. He announced in 1954: `Our government makes no sense unless it is founded on a deeply felt religious faith-and I don't care what it is.’ By this he did not mean, of course, that he was indifferent to the articles of faith, far from it, but that he believed sinchttp://beta.blogger.com/img/blank.gifere faith was conducive to moral conformity, and that religion was the best, cheapest, and least oppressive form of social control. He had made his own personal sacrifice to the demands of conformity. While on active service abroad, 1942-5, he had fallen in love with his Anglo Irish driver, Kay Summersby, and in June 1945, after Germany was beaten, had even considered divorce and remarriage. But this proposal (according to Truman) had been vetoed by a blistering letter from his military superior, General Marshall, who threatened to `bust him out of the army' unless he gave up the idea.

I had to look this up, I knew nothing about such an affair. Not only does the author attempt to bolster the image of Eisenhower with this 'affair', but it seems the affair is based on circumstantial evidence at best. A Google search of Kay Summersby leads to this, and the best source that can be provided as evidence for such an affair comes from a book ghost written on Kay Summersby's deathbed. So, even that is suspect. I am not suggesting that the affair didn't happen, or insinuating any import, I only bring it up because there is no direct evidence for such a situation, but the author presents it as fact, which he then uses to further his subjective theme. Later in the book he reports on the very same situation that Kennedy usually found himself in, but this time the activities are proof of Kennedy's deplorable character.

Although it was entertaining, I regret having paid for such propaganda.