Talbot writes, "It's because we still "don't really know" what happened in Dealey Plaza, since Oswald was conveniently silenced before he "had his day in court."

It is not necessary to have a trial in order to consider the physical and documentary evidence in the assassination of JFK and draw a logical inference.

Most important, Kennedy's death is probably the most investigated murder in history. Yet no one has adduced any credible evidence of a conspiracy, least of all Mr. Talbot.

I haven't read Mr. Talbot's book, so I'll concede for the sake of argument that his reserch and writing are exemplary. It would be a great untold story if Robert Kennedy had engaged in a secret, systematic investigation of his brother's death and left a record of it, but alas, he didn't.

Talbot is then left to write a portrait of the relationship between the brothers, hardly unroken ground, and rehash all the thrice told tales and theories of conspiracy without adducing anything new.

Talbot's book is basically a bag full of air. He also neglects to mention here John McAdams' definitive non-conspiracy web site:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

"Consider this example: Last Thanksgiving, you could have purchased a fairly well-outfitted Windows desktop -- the HP Pavilion Media Center A1640n -- on sale from some retail outlets for $699.

Around the same time, you might instead have picked up Apple's top-of-the-line Mac Mini, ... The Mac Mini would have set you back $799, or $100 more than the HP."

The HP system includes a monitor, keyboard and mouse for the $699 price. The Mac Mini doesn't. By the time the buyer adds those components, the price disparity becomes significantly more than your $100 figure.

Look, I just bought a MacBook Pro, but I'm not fooling myself into believing it is cheaper than a comparably equipped PC laptop. And, as others have already pointed out, resale value plays no role in my purchase decisions. I keep all my consumer electronics equipment as long as they work. And when they fail, they'll have no market value.

Even a quarter century after her Little Rock prime, Gennifer Flowers was one of the most radiant, charismatic people I have ever seen in my life.

Either you really don't get out too often, or your standards are really, really low. Every piece by Camille Paglia can be counted on to include at least one totally ga-ga adoration of one of her pop culture "icons." If it isn't Madonna, it's some pathetic pinup like Anna Nicole Smith, or Gennifer Flowers, still trying to exploit her only claim to fame, having once been a port of call for Bill Clinton's penis.

Ms. Miller's review is so perfunctory and so accepting of Mann's thesis that it reads more like a regurgitated press release than a review. Miller never mentions the quality of Mann's research or writing. She is content to provide a summary of Taylor's supposedly scandalous love life.

To those faulting Mann for not discussing Taylor's performances, it should not surprise anyone who's followed Mann's career as an author. He specializes in exhaustively detailed gossip.