Blogcritics Author: Nick Schweitzer

Book Review: Programming WPF, 2nd Edition by Chris Sells and Ian Griffiths

Nick Schweitzer — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 07:00:15 EST

Programming WPF is the perfect book to jump start developers interested in using the latest GUI technology for building Windows applications.
The Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF, formerly code named Avalon) is the newest framework for programming a graphical user interface in the Microsoft .NET 3.5 Framework (and available as a separate download on top of .NET 3.0). WPF is part of a suite of extensions to .NET which used to be called WinFX, and includes the Windows Communication...

Book Review: Software Estimation - Demystifying the Black Art by Steve McConnell

Nick Schweitzer — Mon, 26 Nov 2007 06:50:40 EST

How to create a good estimate without using complicated formulas or software packages. And without stirring in the eye of newt and toe of frog.
It seems as though to many, software as a whole is a black art. Someone asks for software to perform some vague set of requirements, and then some coders sit around a cauldron, stir in some eye of newt and some toe of frog, and some time later software comes out that hopefully does what you'd like it to do. With that sort of thinking, it ought...

Announcement: Short-content feeds

Phillip Winn — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:00:00 EDT

Sunday, August 26, 2007, marks the switch of all Blogcritics.org article feeds from full-content to short-content. This is the result of several converging factors, and is unfortunately a permanent decision (as permanent as any decision can be on the web, that is). We are aware of all of the reasons that this is a Bad Idea, and we are aware that some of you will be quite upset about having to click on something to read the free content, and we're sorry. Unfortunately, despite great effort, full-content feeds are not currently economically viable. Two other factors are involved: full-content feeds have resulted in an unprecedented level of content theft, with BC content appearing on many websites, usually spam sites, without attribution or permission. This duplicate content causes a cascading set of problems, not the least of which is that search engines generally aren't favorable to duplicate content, and don't always guess correctly. Finally, our RSS advertising partner is strongly in favor of short-content feeds. We hope that you'll continue to subscribe to BC via RSS, and when an article grabs your eye, it's only a click away, still free on the BC website. Thank you for your understanding.

Book Review: Bait and Switch - The (Futile) Pursuit of the American Dream by Barbara Ehrenreich

Nick Schweitzer — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 17:54:01 EDT

In Bait and Switch: The (Futile) Pursuit of the American Dream, Barbara Ehrenreich attempts to infiltrate the shadowy world of the white-collar unemployed in an effort to shed light on their plight, and expose the unfairness of the corporate world. It is an interesting premise for sure, but sadly one that she is unable to pull off. In the end, she only makes disingenuous efforts to get a job, mocking and criticizing the very people she wants to hire her, and seeks out only people and groups that confirm her pre-existing ideas.By all rights, Barbara Ehrenreich is a very successful author, but she admits that she's never held a "normal" 9 to 5 job in her life. She's never been in the corporate world, yet she plans on "infiltrating" this world and getting a job. It's obvious that she has no real intention of doing this early on, for this would destroy the entire premise of her book, which is that it's too hard to get a job. She decides that she's going to attempt to get a job in PR, as that is close to being a journalist, and then invents a resume, filling it with mostly lies that have some sort of factual basis in her life, and finds friends who are willing to lie about her employment history.With her newly minted resume and employment history in hand, she delves into the shadowy world of the white-collar unemployed. She starts by paying for various career counselors and resume "experts" to help her polish what she created. But the effort is poorly done. She seems to seek out the worst people on the Internet, and hires only them, and then complains about the lack of quality people to help the unemployed, and about the unqualified individuals who are trying to take advantage of the helpless. Yet by her own descriptions of the advertisements she answers, they are obviously snake oil salesmen who nobody would bother to hire in the first place. No efforts are made to actually seek out qualified individuals to help her, perhaps because they would see through the fake persona.Even her attempts at networking are a sham. She never actually networks with anyone, although given her situation, it would be hard to see how she truly could (which she eventually admits in the conclusion). Real networking involves reconnecting with former coworkers, college friends, and professionals who have jobs, in an attempt to secure one for herself. Ehrenreich's only efforts at "networking" amount to nothing more than going to unemployment support groups, where no real networking occurs. In fact, the majority of her book takes place at these events. While this allows her to meet other unemployed people and showcase their plight, this does nothing to help her with her own job hunt.Surprisingly little time is actually spent talking about her own honest efforts to secure a job. She only occasionally mentions in passing that she has updated her resume, or made phone calls to several companies, but that is all. The only interviews that she mentions are a session with a career counselor where she tried to convince him to hire her (which she never thought would work anyway), and interviews with AFLAC and Mary Kay for non-salaried, commission-paying jobs with no benefits. According to her own ground rules, this wasn't the type of job she intended to get anyway, so the only purpose in going on these interviews is to condemn that type of employment. The irony of course is that she works in a similar workforce. By trade, she is a freelance writer. Her job is really no different than that of a commissioned salesperson, yet she spends half a chapter denigrating those who would use that type of workforce as taking advantage of people.Sadly, her efforts to expose the hidden group of unemployed is so transparent that it leads me to wonder whether she actually made any real concerted efforts to secure an actual job at all. While there are certainly people who languish in support groups, the plight of the unemployed is not nearly as tragic as she makes it out to be. Having coped with a six-month period of unemployment after a layoff myself, it was easy for me to spot all the things she did absolutely wrong, and then I cringed when I realized that she knew they were wrong herself, but perpetuated the myths to satisfy the premise.

Nick Schweitzer is a software consultant in the Milwaukee area. In his spare time he is an amatuer triathlete, political pundit, and is a recovering geek. He maintains two blogs: The World According to Nick and The Coding Monkey.

Book Review: The Trouble with Physics by Lee Smolin

Nick Schweitzer — Sat, 6 Jan 2007 05:33:31 EST

Has science lost its way? What is the nature of the universe, and more importantly, how do we go about discovering it? In the past 30 years, one theory to answer this question has dominated the physics community. String theory, while starting off as a fringe concept in science, has taken over the field. Virtually all work on theoretical physics now centers around it. But is string theory deserving of all this attention? And even if ultimately found to be correct, is examining only one theory at a time the right way to approach science? Does science need competition to have progress? These questions are discussed in The Trouble with Physics by Lee Smolin.The Trouble with Physics is split into four parts, each of which offers an excellent look into science through different prisms. Part I concentrates on the history of physics, and specifically the concept of unification, as well as the questions that string theory tries to answer. Unification is the idea that two disparate concepts in science are actually related somehow. Gravity and acceleration were unified by Einstein, electricity and magnetism were unified by Maxwell. Some attempts at unification have failed, such as the unification of light and sound using ether. In fact, there have been just as many failed attempts at unification as there have been successful ones. As different theories were put forth, experiments would be devised in due course to test them. Over time, evidence would mount that would allow the scientific community to conclude whether the theory was valid or not, usually in the span of about 10 years. This idea repeats many times throughout the book, as string theory is examined, since there is no experimental evidence that string theory is correct, even after 30 years.Part II looks specifically at the history of string theory. Here Smolin writes a fairly easy-to-read history, and tells the tale with great suspense. He goes to great lengths not to fault string theory at every turn in it's history. Quite the contrary, there are many times when reading the chapters in this part where you'll be convinced that string theory is right, only to find out later that something new was discovered to dash the hopes of scientists everywhere. As each new problem is discovered, some new idea is tacked on in what ends up being a desperate attempt to save the theory, until we're finally left with something that is nothing like an Elegant Universe. This is far from a hatchet job on string theory though. Smolin spends considerable time describing what string theory does well at explaining, but at the same time explains why this is not enough to conclude that string theory is proven science as so many have.Part II looks beyond string theory. Unlike some who claim that it's the only game in town, there are competing theories aimed at unifying gravity and quantum theory. Some of these theories may seem disturbing to many who are interested in physics because they make basic assumptions that long held scientific theories are wrong. Could Einstein have been wrong about General Relativity? Is it possible that the speed of light is not constant, and has actually changed over the history of the universe? There are some people who think so, and are even devising experiments in an attempt to prove this one way or another. Even Einstein's "great mistake", the cosmological constant, is making a comeback thanks to new findings in the field of cosmology. Smolin examines these new discoveries, and how they might ultimately bear fruit in the form of new theories distinct from string theory. Are any of them correct? We don't know. But their mere existence is proof that String Theory is not the be all and end all of science.More to the point, Smolin goes on to argue in the last Part that science needs competing theories in order to survive. In an interesting discussion on the nature of science, Smolin makes the point that when there are no competing theories, we never have reason to explore new possibilities, and science stagnates, as it has in the past 30 years. For all time, science has depended not just on journeyman scientists, but also visionaries who explore wild new ideas and think outside the box. But because of the nature of the University system, and its funding in the last quarter century, virtually all these visionaries have been pushed to the outside and receive little funding. What's left are a group of sheep who are herded by a few leaders, deciding what new areas of string theory should be investigated. Smolin argues convincingly that this is a waste of time and talent, and also bad for scientific progress, whether string theory is ultimately found to be true or false.In the end, The Trouble with Physics is an excellent book for anyone interested in the latest controversies in science. But it's not just about physics and math, so much as it's about the history of physics, and the meaning of science. One doesn't have have to be a physicist or a mathematician to understand what is discussed, even if a few ideas go over your head.

TV Review: My Boys

Nick Schweitzer — Wed, 29 Nov 2006 21:54:28 EST

As the old saying goes, everything that's old is new again, and that's the case with the new TBS sitcom My Boys. This new half hour comedy stars Jordan Spiro as P.J. Franklin, a sports writer for the Chicago Sun Times. She portrays the typical tomboy who has grown up, and is now surrounded more by male friends than female, and struggling as a single woman in the big city. About the only recognizable face among her group of male cohorts is stand-up comedian Jim Gaffigan, who plays her older brother Andy.As I watched the series premier, and one follow-up episode Tuesday night, I was struck immediately by how closely it resembled another show that TBS has picked up in syndication, Sex and the City. In fact, the similarities are apparent in the very first scene, where we here a voiceover by P.J., often times relating relationships to sports as she's writing her column. Carrie Bradshaw, anyone? In fact, the entire premise of the show is really based on the same mold as Sex and the City. Syndicated writer who has relationship issues, and is surrounded by a small, very close knit group of friends, who all help each other out with their relationship problems, or in some cases cause those problems. The only difference is that the small group of friends are all men, instead of other women. Instead of the local restaurant where the four girls meet on Sex and the City, My Boys features a weekly poker game at P.J.'s house.And just as the first major plot point on Sex and the City was Carrie's possible, or not possible, relationship with "Mr. Big", My Boys has gone the same route. The first two episodes concentrate on a new relationship with coworker Bobby Newman (played by Kyle Howard). The relationship immediately runs into problems, when he doesn't know how to handle a tomboy type who makes him feel more like a woman than she is. Added to that is the fact that the other guy friends of P.J.'s want to add him into the gang, instead of allowing the relationship to bud. Is there something there or isn't there? It all seems so very familiar.Of course My Boys doesn't feature the raw sexuality that Sex and the City was famous for, and by basing its storytelling around a tomboy instead of a prom queen, the look into the relationships is more geared toward male audiences. It certainly brings a different comedic perspective to the age-old questions about men and women. And while it doesn't feature a lot of laugh out loud moments, it's certainly very entertaining, and might just hit a little too close to home for some viewers, which always makes it more fun. My Boys is on Tuesday nights at 10/9c.

TV Review: Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip - "Nevada Day Parts I & II"

Nick Schweitzer — Thu, 16 Nov 2006 16:31:30 EST

"Nevada Day" was a two part episode, which concluded this week, and included John Goodman as a small town Nevada judge controlling the fate of several Studio 60 actors. The episode begins with Tom Jeeter (Nathan Corddry) and Simon Stiles (D.L. Hughley) sitting in a small sheriff's office waiting for Tom's arraignment along with several studio executives and an unknown Chinese businessman and his daughter. Through a carefully crafted flashback, we're shown how this all took place.The basic conflict set up in the episode is over a quote of Harriet Hayes' (Sarah Paulson) in a magazine where she says that, according to the Bible, homosexuality is a sin, but also that "thou shalt not judge lest ye be judged," and it is something for people smarter than her to decide. The magazine only reported the first part of her comment. While in Los Angeles, a group of the Studio 60 actors are confronted on the street by a group of gay people upset over the comments, and while defending Harriet, Tom Jeeter pushes one of the men over, and then all the actors flee. The man who was pushed subsequently files a complaint, and Tom is arrested while wearing Simon Stiles' jacket -- Tom was cold and Simon let him borrow it, which had a half-smoked joint in it. Matters are complicated even further when it's discovered that Tom has an outstanding warrant against him for going 115 MPH through a small Nevada town named Pahrump.This causes even more trouble because NBS is trying to close a deal with a distribution outlet in Hong Kong, and the only way the deal will go through is if the Hong Kong executive's daughter gets to meet her favorite Studio 60 actor -- Tom Jeeter, now in cuffs in Nevada. The group of executives and a lawyer make their way to Pahrump to throw their weight around and get Tom released, while Simon goes to try and fall on his sword. He wants the judge to know the joint was in his jacket and was his joint, and Tom shouldn't be charged for possession or use.Things only get worse for the group since it's Nevada Day, which celebrates the day Nevada was admitted to the Union, and all public offices are closed. The fact that the judge (John Goodman) is pulled from a fishing trip by the Governor who received campaign contributions from the NBS chairman doesn't help. Of course, the fact that the judge is an old-fashioned small town judge who hates Studio 60, and its attitudes toward society, hurts even more.The stage is then set for a two episode debate over homosexual marriage. The dynamic Studio 60 gives to this debate is actually quite unique, and is far more real than anything else you normally see on TV. While most shows broaching the topic tend to have everyone on one side or the other, and create a very confrontational atmosphere, Studio 60's writers have forced friends who know and respect each other, and in some cases love each other, to debate the issue both within themselves and with each other. Harriet is attacked for her viewpoint, and her friends come to her defense without question (though we don't necessarily know how they feel on the topic). Even the head writer, Matt (Matthew Perry), after spending the majority of both episodes berating her for her beliefs, finally confides in Harriet the thing that upset him most was not being the one to defend her on the street.A similar conflict carries over into Pahrump's sheriff's office, where it's discovered that Tom was originally speeding so he could meet his brother who was deploying for a third tour in the Middle East. Tom refused to tell this to the judge because he didn't want his brother getting him out of the mess. The connection is discovered because Tom wears a bracelet that his brother gave him. We're left with a strong reminder that not everything is cut and dry in the political debate. The judge may hate the show these guys create, but they are not their show. Matt may hate Harriet's beliefs, but she is not the sum total of those ideas. And whether Matt likes it or not, her fierce grip on her values is one of the things that draws him to her.It's a lesson we could all stand to remember.

Book Review: Not Even Wrong by Peter Woit

Nick Schweitzer — Tue, 14 Nov 2006 05:58:23 EST

In the particle physics community, the past 20 years has been filled with either very exciting new discoveries, or a complete lack of progress, depending on your point of view. The reason for this is that the majority of research in this field of science has been devoted to a theory which some don't even view as proper science. This theory, which has excited many and dumbfounded even more, is known as String Theory, Super String Theory, or M-Theory, depending on the version you are studying. Not Even Wrong attempts to make the unpopular case that string theory, and its more recent derivatives, is failed science and should be abandoned so that scarce resources can be devoted to other more promising theories.The idea that a theory can not only be wrong, but "isn't even wrong" was popularized by the physicist Wolfgang Pauli, to describe that an idea that isn't just wrong, it doesn't actually make any predictions which are either verifiable, or falsifiable, and thus provides nothing of value. To some brave physicists who are willing to espouse such views, string theory would seem to fall into this category.This book is definitely not for the faint of heart in terms of communicating complicated math and physics. I had to read through the first half of the book twice in order to get a decent understanding of the ideas being thrown out. Much of this first half is a history lesson of theoretical particle physics, but with some technical elements easy to get lost in. It describes in some detail the major breakthroughs that occurred pre- and post-WWII that culminated in the development of the Standard Model, and different versions of quantum theory. Sometimes this history lesson is nothing more than a listing of important events, without much context as to why it's important to the central theme of the book. After finishing the entire text, it is now obvious that the entire point of the first half of the book was to layout the case (a case which many would say should need no explanation) that physics should be based on experimentally proved facts, and not on hopes and grand ideas that can't be proved. This laundry list of experimental evidence is left in stark contrast the lack of evidence that string theory has to back it up.The second half of the book contains the major dissection of string theory. The central argument is that string theory it really isn't a theory at all, but more a framework that many hope will one day lead to a theory. We find that string theory, and its later derivatives, don't actually posit anything which is falsifiable. In what the author views as an act of desperation, this fact is now considered to be an advantage, and could (or already has) led to a detrimental shift in how physics is studied. The universe is now a "multiverse." When attempting to solve string theory equations, if one equation doesn't result in something which agrees with experimentally proved fact, than it is said that this must apply to another universe, and another version would surely work in ours. The only proof that is provided behind this idea is the anthropic principle. This basically means that since we're here and alive, there must be a version of the equations which work. However, so many assumptions are made in the theory that this is more of a leap of faith than science. And since any version could be true, string theory loses all predictive power in our universe, and so one is left to wonder what use it has.While the author is not afraid to go after the current direction of physics, and point out what he thinks is wrong, he also shows much praise to those who are espousing these wrong views. He goes to some length to explain the new directions and discoveries that have been made in advanced mathematics that have come as a direct result of investigating string theory. Although he feels that string theory itself if a bust, much of the math that has come about attempting to prove string theory could lead to new discoveries in and of itself. This may be the saving grace that string theory has in the annals of history.The last chapters attempt to explain why so many scientists refuse to accept that string theory is a failed idea. The author provides some very interesting insight into the current state of academic achievement, grant programs, and peer pressure. Like the old gambler who constantly loses at the poker tables, and is told that the tables in the city are rigged, many physicists continue to examine string theory because they say "it's the only game in town." In essence, because so many people have invested in it with their careers and their pride, many are simply passing the buck, and waiting for someone else to explore new waters. A few theories are trying to make their way into the fold, and Woit briefly explains a few of them, but only about one chapter is devoted to the subject. What he does provide throughout the book however, are the names of other well known books in each subject he discusses for those who want even more in-depth knowledge than he is willing to provide here.In the end, Not Even Wrong gives an interesting counterpoint to several other books that have made string theory accessible and popular in the public mind, including Brian Greene's The Elegant Universe. The first half of the book can be hard to understand, but that doesn't detract from the overall theme of the book, though it can make it a difficult read at times.

TV Review: Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip

Nick Schweitzer — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 17:52:42 EDT

What do you get when you cross the late 1990s television series Sports Night with Saturday Night Live? You get Aaron Sorkin's newest creation, Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip. If you watched Sports Night and enjoyed it, then you'll probably like Studio 60. And if you didn't like Sorkin's earlier sitcom creation, you probably won't like Studio 60 either. The only differences between the two are their length (Sports Night was only half an hour), and the type of television show-within-a-show their plots are based around. While Sports Night was centered on a sports newscast similar to ESPN's Sports Center, Studio 60 centers around an SNL-style sketch comedy show on a network called NBS, which is no doubt an homage to the network paying for Studio 60.The differences end there. Everything else in Studio 60 is quite familiar from Sports Night, from the camera angles to the plot devices. Also present in Studio 60 is much of the subtle and overt hostility to religion and conservatism that supposedly made Sports Night unpopular with the management at ABC and Disney and led to its demise after only two seasons. Will Studio 60 suffer the same fate? It is yet to be seen whether the spirit of the times has sufficiently changed, whether Studio 60's new network (where another of Sorkin's creations, The West Wing, did well) will be more tolerant, or whether audiences will prove more receptive to this type of show. Unfortunately, the feeling of being lectured on current political topics often detracts from the show's ever-present humor, which is not always in-your-face like a standard sitcom.You will see some familiar actors trying to break free of typecasting. Most notable is Matthew Perry, taking his first major role since Chandler on Friends. Some of his special personality quirks are still present. However, he does well growing into his part as Matt Albie, a writer for the show, which requires more subtle humor and character development than did the role of Chandler. Another notable face is Amanda Peet, who plays Jordan McDeere, a network executive at NBS. Sometimes it's hard to take Peet seriously, especially in some of her interactions with other characters. Her immature style doesn't suit the role of a serious executive trying to bring more quality programming to her network.Sarah Paulson is doing the best job, portraying a complicated character. She plays one of the actresses, Harriet Hayes, who is openly religious, or at least as openly religious a show like this allows. While this dynamic creates some interesting plot points, especially in Hayes' relationship with Matthew Perry's character, it sometimes feels forced. Despite the balanced portrayals of different ends of the political spectrum, audiences will, again, feel like they're being lectured on the latest controversial news.Overall, the show does a good job striking a balance between drama and comedy. If you're looking for a show that will make you laugh from beginning to end, then Studio 60 is not it. But if you're interested in watching good characters develop over time, seeing some controversial political jabs, and enjoying some subtle, complex humor, Studio 60 is worth the effort. The only thing that remains to be seen is whether the show will build enough of an audience to survive in a harsh television environment where reality TV rules and controversial politics is still not greeted warmly.

Book Review: XAML in a Nutshell by Lori A. MacVittie

Nick Schweitzer — Wed, 24 May 2006 01:39:45 EDT

Since the inception of the first version of Windows, graphical user interface (GUI) design has not changed much. Though languages have come and gone, and also evolved with the operating system, even to the extent of wrapping these APIs and simplifying GUI design, the core base of original API functions for interacting with Windows has always been at its heart. User interfaces have always been primarily created by software developers, who oftentimes are not the most skilled at graphics design, or usability. Now with the Internet being increasingly part of our daily lives, people see the rich set of graphics and controls on the web, and wonder why those same rich graphics aren't part of their stand-alone Windows applications.XAML, which stands for eXtensible Application Markup Language, is a new XML compliant syntax for declaratively creating user interfaces separate from the code behind them. It is part of the new set of APIs that are being introduced in Windows Vista called WPF (Windows Presentation Framework, previously code named Avalon) and will radically change how applications are developed for Windows. WPF, along with other new technologies for cross process communications, are together called WinFX. For the first time, not only will software developers be able to create user interfaces, but now graphics artists and designers will be able to create user interfaces that developers can attach their code to, much like how many web pages are developed today.XAML in a Nutshell is divided into two parts. The first half of the book is a general primer on how to create an application front end with XAML. Even if you've never heard of XAML, this book gives a good starting point to begin your investigations into this new technology. The author lists all the resources you'll need to begin developing applications, and makes sure to provide sample code that will work with the free tools available. General syntax is covered, as well as the basics of layout and positioning, graphics resources, and animations. Because this new way of creating interfaces is so different than previous methods used for Windows programming, it is very good to see that the sample applications are very simple, and build on each other one step at a time, adding only one new concept with each step. This way, you can see how minor changes to the code can sometimes have radical effects on the overall look of your application, and compare different layout mechanisms side by side.Also included, but given less weight, are examples of .NET code, which can be used to interact with a XAML-based GUI. Most of the .NET code examples focus on how to connect your XAML application to the code-behind files, and on how to consume events that are fired from a XAML front end. Of course, the book is XAML in a Nutshell, not C# in a Nutshell, but because a front end is pretty useless without business logic behind it, more detail on the various ways that .NET can interact with XAML would have been helpful.The second part of the book is a core XAML reference. All of the XAML elements, controls, shapes, and layout elements are covered along with all their various properties. Finally, the animation elements are described in detail, as are the various events that can be fired in XAML. One important thing to remember however is that XAML as a language and its syntax have not been finalized, and so parts of this reference may quickly become obsolete as newer technical previews become available from Microsoft.Microsoft has come out in strong support of the current .NET Windows Forms framework, and has said that even after Vista has been released, developers will be able to choose between the current Windows Forms technologies, and the Windows Presentation Framework. Depending on the needs of your application and your development team, Windows Forms may still be the best option for you. But with the impressive set of features that WPF and XAML bring to the table, and the ease with which they can be utilized, it is important to stay up to date and learn about them. XAML in a Nutshell is an excellent book for this purpose.

Book Review: The Constitution in Exile by Andrew P. Napolitano

Nick Schweitzer — Tue, 2 May 2006 15:40:57 EDT

The Department of Education, federal regulations on the size of toilet flushes, federal gun-free school zones, national drinking ages - where are these things defined in the US Constitution? In the more than 200 years since the Constitution was adopted, the size of the federal government has grown steadily, much to the detriment of individual rights. In The Constitution in Exile, Judge Andrew Napolitano starts at the infancy of our country and explains how the federal government has grown over time, citing key laws and Supreme Court decisions that were truly insulting to the original intent of many of our founding fathers.Napolitano holds no punches in this book. He travels back in history to show that many of the controversial issues facing us today, like the current War on Terror, are nothing new, and that some of the presidents that history shows as great trampled on our civil liberties as much, if not more than, George W. Bush is accused of doing now. Even Abraham Lincoln is not spared, when the author refers to him as an emperor and shows that he never cared about freeing the slaves, only that it was just a convenient means to an end. The final chapters of The Constitution in Exile look at some key Supreme Court cases that were just decided or are currently pending, and also examine the US Patriot Act.The Constitution in Exile covers several of the major abuses of the Constitution, and how these holes have been gradually expanded over time. From expanding the commerce clause to controlling the private growth of wheat in farms and weed in California, to using "general welfare" to bribe states to do what they don't want to do, you'll be surprised at the ways the federal government has been allowed to go where it was never intended.It is obvious that Napolitano is very passionate about Natural Rights, and is a very strict constitutional constructionist. However, as the story unfolds, what had started as a well-reasoned and documented critique of constitutional law turns into more of a rant as more contemporary issues are discussed towards the end. He makes several claims about current events, sometimes with little supporting evidence in footnotes, which is unfortunate because much of what he discusses is very weighty, and pulling in more evidence would have certainly helped.His conclusion is also very lacking. The entire book is filled with many examples of where Congress and the Supreme Court have wrongly interpreted the Constitution, but Napolitano doesn't provide many details as to how he would improve the system. He simply provides a few brief bullet points without much explanation as to how it would help, or how it would have helped in the examples he cited throughout the book. In the end you're left with a long history on where things have gone wrong, but few ideas on where to go from here. His idea of repealing the 17th Amendment, which allows for the direct election of Senators, is very intriguing, but is not supported by any facts earlier in the book. Nowhere does he correlate an increase in government size to Senate actions taken since the 17th Amendment was passed.Overall, civil libertarians and anyone who is interested in the Constitution will find this a very interesting read. Of course, anyone who is shocked by their tax bill every April should read this book to see how their money is being spent. Understanding what the Constitution was originally intended to do, and how it has been distorted over time is something that every citizen should know.