Janeane Garofalo Books

It is time to reclaim this great nation for the people in it! This book isn't just about reviving the Democratic party, but reviving America's zeal to be part of their own government again. so many people in recent years have given up. They feel powerless in the shadow of a government that has been snatched from the hands of the Americans it's supposed to represent.

Bill Scher's book is "call to arms" for all those people who have given up. It's time to get back in the game to reclaim OUR government and this book is a great guide for the "everyday American". Mr. Scher shows us that deep pockets are not the only way to control a government and shows us different ways WE THE PEOPLE can once again be involved in governing ourselves. His mantra of Representative, Responsive and Responsible use of taxes should be the biggest buzzwords in every election for public office from now on. I will happily pay my taxes when I know that the money is not being recklessly squandered by the elected officials sworn to protect and preserve this country.

From now on I'll be making my elected representatives accountable for where my tax dollars go. This book has actually given me, the average citizen, concrete ways to do that. Thank you, Mr. Scher!

Bill's book is awesome. It explains very clearly the ideals of the Democratic Party, better than I've heard any of them explain it. I want to get all Democratic Senators and Congressmen a copy of this book so they can explain to the public what they (we) stand for and end the confusion. I don't know how Bill figured it all out, but his writing is very logical and clear. It's freshness cuts thru all the BS we hear every day. Bill, please stay in the political landscape...we need you badly!

Solid advice for surviving these trying times and helping our fellow citizens into the light. Several books have been written outlining some of these principals, this one is simple to read and lighter than most; and in these trying times sometimes we need a break.

Well written and fun to read, I believe it is not overstating the case to say that this is the most important book on liberal politics currently in print. With amazing clarity, it details the precise strategy the Democrats need to win back America and save it from years of disastrous Republican policies. Don't let the title fool you -- this a serious and wise book that everyone should read.

Scher's book methodically lays out the values that liberals embrace and that the Democratic Party has been mysteriously running away from for years. It is the perfect companion to "Crashing the Gate," Markos Moultitsas Zuniga's book on the mechanics of transforming top-down Democratic Party politics into a more democratic and broad-based entity infused and enlivened by grassroots values. Markos purposefully avoids describing in that book what those values are. Don't Move to Canada describes those liberal grassroots values and how they can best be articulated.

Scher, who has a background in public relations, explains how "liberal" was transformed into a negative label by the Republicans and how it can be rehabilitated by accurately framing the political debate, among other things.

If the Democratic Party adopted the platform Scher outlines in his book, they would have a chance to remake America as a country that embodies the ideals on which it was founded and which we have come to identify as making America great.

This book has been an eye opener to me! So much information! And obviously all of it well researched and documented. I never knew so much goes on behind the scenes of American elections that cannot stand the light of day. If I would live in the US I certainly would want to vote and be passionate about which party I would vote for: definitely the Democrats who seem to look after the people instead of their bank accounts.

I will admit it and I will be flamed by the extremist in the comment sections, I could not finish this book, heck I couldn't even finish most chapters - it's that bad.

Let me explain I am a ex-member of the Democrat Party, but NOT a republican. I am a JFK democrat at heart with no party to turn too and a lot of that reason is the likes of Palast and other extreme fringe leftists that abducted the once great Democratic Party and have pulled it so far to the left it is an embarrassment to the likes of JFK.

When you become so isolated like Palast you fell that you do not have any reason to investigate ALL of the facts, instead he simply cherry-picks and in some cases embellishes just a few of the multitude of facts and then presents them to the reader as the whole story.

I cannot really call his writing propaganda because true propaganda gets 95% of the facts correct and then tweaks the last 5% to sway you to their position. In Palast's case he only mentions 3% facts 2% factoids and then opines the 95%.

The book is great for the choir or the highly uniformed or unintelligent but those of us who take interest into politics and world events and have just a general grasp of the facts will continually be saying while you read the book:

What about this?
or
what about that?
or
What about the rest of the story?
or
That's not true?
or
Please just once report something truthfully then opine on it?
or
You left out 95% of the facts that go against your conclusion.

A book that does that is of no use to anyone except the choir.

Conclusion:

It will be frustrating to read this book if you have even a modicum of intelligence and fairness in your blood, the amount of facts and data left out will infuriate and you will know immediately you are being duped. However, for the extremist left, those who have that visceral hatred of Bush, this book will be like red meat is to a pack of starving hyenas, they will swallow it whole.

Palast is great. Too bad one of our mass media doesn't hire him as an investigative reporter, but the corporate determiners of what the public can be permitted won't allow it. At least Great Britain gets his reporting as it happens while we must await his books. This book is on the mark and an extremely worthwhile read!

It's unfortunate that more books on this topic are not written and/or widely read. Palast does a good job of trying to keep this issue in the mainstream. Unfortunately, I think he cheapens the effort by writing in a style that is overly sarcastic and glib. The whole book comes across as a left wing hatchet piece. The shortcomings of the Bush administration and Congress are plain to see for anyone who takes the time to even read a book. I think the cause would have been better served by more straightforward reporting and less commentary. Palast's disdain literally drips off the page.

There is one short passage on pg 228 about the replacement of the Broward County Supervisor of Elections, Miriam Oliphant. I live in Broward and this was a major news story for months. Palast portrays her as being replaced by a republican because of her objections to the voting systems. Nothing could be further from the truth. She was replaced because she was incompetent. She bungled elections, mismanaged her staff and budget, and was a terrible manager. The Democratic party led the effort to have her removed. Governor Bush actually refused to remove her at first. Also, her replacement was a democrat, not a republican as Palast states.

Although, I did not take the time to re-check any other facts. This one I knew to be untrue just sort of turned me off from his whole style. He is overly anxious to portray every single action and fact as contributing to his whole case. This important issue would have been better brought to light by a more serious investigative piece. For example, Thomas Ricks did not need to inject sarcasm into Fiasco to crucify Bush's handling of the Iraq war. Bottom line, this book is written with such a severe slant that the only people who will read it already agree with his conclusions. It's not likely to change any minds.

Greg Palast is an investigative journalist with a penchant for hard- hitting, yet humorous and highly readable commentary on the political happenings of our time. In "Armed Madhouse", Palast presents one of his best efforts yet at exposing the dishonesty and motivations of the Bush administration in regards to the War Against Iraq, the War on Terror, the Hurricane Katrina debacle, the loyalty to Big Oil, and the tactics used to ensure a Bush victory in 2004 as well as help better ensure a Republican presidential victory in 2008. Starting with the Iraqi war, this book presents its investigative work for all to see; showing how the war was started on false pretenses; how oil influenced the decision to invade Iraq; and some of the likely reasons why Bush wanted Saddam Hussein out of power. A large part of this book is devoted to the Iraqi war and the influence of oil in politics and some of the investigations and findings will surprise the average reader. Most everyone already knows about the false "weapons of mass destruction" charge, but few may realize some of the key motives for getting rid of Saddam when there were far more dangerous leaders in the world worth taking out. These motives are presented in the book, along with explanations, and they offer some good thinking points on the true motives for invading Iraq.

My favorite part of Armed Madhouse is Chapter four, in which Palast exposes the Election of 2004 for the fraud that it was. Most people are already fully aware of the problems with the Election of 2000, but few are aware of the different tactics used to ensure a Bush re- election victory in 2004. Palast admits that the problem in 2004 wasn't anything openly dishonest, like erasing millions of votes from the record books. He points out that the 2004 election swindle was conducted in a much subtler way, so that few would take notice. It basically comes down to this: It is a known fact that minorities vote in large percentages for Democratic candidates. Therefore, to swing an election, all that a determined individual or organization has to do is find ways to disqualify or discourage people from these different groups from voting, or find ways to not count their votes after they are cast. This is what happened in 2004, according to the book, and what it says isn't far- fetched at all. By finding ways to disqualify votes in areas (or among groups of people) that are heavily Democratic, an election outcome can easily be changed. This is what happened in 2004 when Kerry actually won the majority of votes cast, but Bush won the majority of votes counted. It has happened before and it will likely happen again in 2008.

A related chapter to the one on the election mishaps is the chapter on class warfare. Here, Palast offers some explanations on the motivations behind the Bush White House and its efforts to expand poverty and keep the poor in their place. From the Social Security issue to Bush's "No Child's Behind Left", Palast points out what he feels is the main reason why Bush and his administration propose the policies that they do: To quietly and deceptively promote class warfare and ensure that the United States always has an underclass. I like some of the points made in this chapter, but other points are not as strong and they could mislead readers. For example, it is true that the number of people living below the poverty line has increased with Bush in office, but it is not true that the Social Security system is completely safe and secure. Yes, some politicians use scary projections to make the people believe that the Social Security system is going to go bankrupt in the next five years. That is an exaggeration, but it is an equal exaggeration on the part of Palast to pretend the system stands on rock- solid ground.

Palast offers a good dose of humor when he writes, and he comes up with some very clever quips about the different policies of the Bush administration and different events that have taken place while Bush has been in office. Another quality I like about Armed Madhouse is the copies of different documents that Palast and his team obtained during their investigative work. Using the Freedom of Information Act and other means, Palast was able to get his hands on many incriminating documents and he includes some of them in this book. It is funny how portions of so many different documents are blackened out by the senders, in an effort to make sure that the public doesn't discover the full truth. The book presents the documents in their tampered- state, so that readers can see exactly what happened to them. They are very telling about the secretiveness of the Bush administration.

Overall, I like Armed Madhouse and I recommend it to anyone who has an interest in the inner- workings of the Bush White House. The economic ramblings are often off the mark, and some criticisms are taken a bit far. But I like the book's outspoken style and the fact that Palast talks straight without getting too rude or resorting to name calling. George W. Bush is nearing the end of his White House reign, but his legacy is well established and his political shenanigans will remain in the spotlight for years to come as more and more facts continue to expose themselves. And thanks to courageous reporters like Greg Palast and others like him, the people will eventually find out some of the truth.

Fast shipping and delivery. It's not what i was expecting, but was pleasantly suprised anyway. Thanx.

I could never understand why this film flopped. I saw it opening weekend in the theater and it was packed. Everyone there was really into it. I went back twice more while it was in the theater, and while it was never as full, most of the seats were occupied. And people were just as enthusiastic. It is still great at home, although not as fun. The music expresses what simple words couldn't, it sets the mood. I wouldn't sit around and listen to it away from the movie, but it works. It's really too bad that fox animation went under. I hate the way that Disney "disnifies" every film they get their hands on, and it would have been nice for them to have some competition.

I saw this movie in theater, obviously it's cool.
But wondering, the story in the video seem like... it had a little bit different over the movie in theater although when I search in deleted scene, that missing scene had never found.

My sons and I love this movie, so do the neighbor kids.
It's got a great story, wonderful characters, and impressive
graphics. It'll be in our Sci-Fi movie collection for years
to come.

I've seen where people put this movie down a lot but let me tell you I really enjoyed it. If your one of those people who likes to sit back and pick apart a plot, then any movie is hard pressed to make you happy. If you let yourself be immersed in the universe this movie takes place in, you'll really enjoy it. I am a big fan of the post apocalypse genre and this movie is a refreshing new take on it. I'm not going to give you a synopsis of the movie but it is a good epic space opera worth seeing.

Boomsday is a drop dead funny look at one rebellous blogger, Cassandra Devine, and our current dysfunctional Social Security system. Cassandra's solution is simple: Give Baby Boomers government incentives to kill themselves by age seventy-five. Why should that upset anyone? If her father had not blown her Yale tuition on a dot.com start-up, she would've never wound up having sex in a minefield with a U.S. Congressman to begin with. Okay, so she has some anger issues...
This book reminds me of Evelyn Waugh's irreverent book The Loved One, also (recommend). Buckley is hilarious!

DC Harvard Alums Book Club had a mixed reaction to BOOMSDAY. As satire on Washington, many felt that the book hit the mark, while others thought that the jokes got a little old and the story line started to drag. This is not to discount Buckley's ability to paint vivid character portraits that have become such a large part of his style. But as a send up of Washington, some members felt that Jeffrey Frank's THE COLUMNIST provides an even sharper wit and insight into the ways and means of Washington DC. One member suggested that the book was more a "treatment" for Hollywood consideration, than a true novel. Chapters are very short. The story line hops around and when the story advances it does so with a cinematic quality (which is great for movies, but not what novels are suppose to be about). Buckley is an excellent provocateur. While the club discussed his novel for about 30 minutes. The discussion really heated up over the next hour when we discussed end of life issues, social security reform and how club members are dealing/dealt with aged parents. It was a lively discussion, one that Cassandra, Gideon and all the other characters of BOOMSDAY would have enjoyed.

Christopher Buckley's title as the master of the "nothing-sacred" school of satire is as steady as ever with his latest novel, 2007's "Boomsday". But black humor only goes so far without interesting characters or story.

Cassandra Devine is 20-something, beautiful, and has something of a chip on her shoulder. High-profile PR flack by day, Red Bull-swilling blogger at night, she sets in motion a taxpayer revolt like no other. Her target: Baby Boomers about to enter retirement and force working America to pay for their martini-soaked Social-Security-funded dotage. Her recommended solution: Kill them all!

Actually, her recommendation for what she euphemistically terms "transitioning" would work on a voluntary basis, and her actual commitment to the idea, like much else in this book, is left vague. "Boomsday" lacks focus in a lot of ways. It seems to be a conscious revisiting of the theme of his best-known novel, "Thank You For Smoking", with a Washington spinmeister pushing death on the masses. Only this time the story gets away from Buckley rather quickly.

Buckley still crafts engaging prose, presenting Cassandra's central thesis with memorable pungency: "Our grandparents grew up in the Depression and fought in World War Two. They were the so-called Greatest Generation. Our parents, the Baby Boomers, dodged the draft, snorted cocaine, made self-indulgence a virtue. I call them the Ungreatest Generation."

But when you make it past the snarky set ups and whip-smart rejoinders, you find little in the way of a story. Buckley's dialogue works for a while, until you realize everyone has the same clever-preppy voice. Cassandra whines about the mess of her life even as she beds a Senator, lands on the cover of Time magazine, and suffers no fallout from her controversial position. Even the shady boss of her PR firm stands beside her, for reasons never made clear. If this is supposed to make us hate Cassandra's elders for holding her down, it's not working.

Maybe Buckley thought of this, and was aiming to shoot Cassandra down at some point, the way he did "Smoking's" anti-hero Nick Naylor. Only he doesn't pull the trigger. He doesn't resolve her story in any way, nor any of the other subplots here, such as an evangelist who discovers sex, a tech-billionaire who craves a Cabinet post, or a President who uses domestic espionage to extend his unpopular administration. They are instead tossed up for evanescent amusement, then conveniently forgotten.

"Thank You For Smoking" isn't a classic; it's a bit facile and lacks the sense of humanity, however dyspeptic, that marks the work of satirists like Swift or Waugh. But its smart narrative mechanics and Naylor's character arc make it a veritable classic beside "Boomsday's" mentality of "whatever".

Read "Boomsday", if you must, for the relevant argument on Social Security and with the understanding Buckley can, and has, done better.

The basic plot for Boomsday is a great idea and hats off to Christopher Buckley to be prepared to tackle this serious issue. One that's not just for America but any western country with a social security system and a declining birth rate. Currently in the news, we out here in Australia have the two opposing generation camps going at it as the old age pensioners complain they can't live on the, in their words only measly $280 a week government handout. Countering that argument are the younger generation (who won't even have a pension when they reach retirement age and are being forced to save part of their income in an untouchable until they get really old account known as Superannuation). The young generation point out that a lot of them don't even make $280 from paid employment and they will never be able to afford buy their own homes, whilst so the so called struggling retirees go home to their houses now worth at least three quarters of a million dollars that they paid less than a hundred grand for a few decades ago. So I eagerly looked forward to reading Boomsday just to see how Buckley's fictional generation representatives played this very relevant to today scenario out. I have to admit though, I was kind of disappointed.

Don't get wrong there are some great characters in here, none more so than Cassandra Devine a young girl whose dreams were cut short as her father gambled away her college fund on his dotcom business, so even though she got into Yale all she could hope for was that by serving in the military, they would pay her fees years down the track. Cassandra has an encounter with a dim witted politician in a minefield so is forced to take a spin doctor job in the real world. Obsessed with blogging she declares war on what she terms the "ungreatest generation" but who call themselves the babyboomers. She proposes a plan to give incentives for individuals from this generation to kill themselves and remove the burden that is them from society when they reach the age of seventy. What the story really missed though was some great eccentric old people like found in Dave Barry's Tricky Business. Most of the baby boomer characters such as the PR boss Terry and Senator Randolph Jepperson were on the youth viewpoint side. President Peacham although stupid didn't have any eccentric funny characteristics at all. The only babyboomer that did was TV priest Gideon Payne was too much of a loser for you to expect that side of the debate could win. The novel was lighter than other killing off old people novels such as P J Tracy's Live Bait. It did have a fair few funny moments in it but the main problem with Boomsday is that it doesn't have a satisfactory ending. The story is going along and then suddenly there's an epilogue. It's almost as if Buckley couldn't be bothered writing anymore or had no idea how his story was going to end. None of the important issues the book is about are resolved at all by the characters leaving the reader to wonder if the real world can do it all either.

If you like eccentric character fiction also check out authors Carl Hiaasen with his novels such as Stormy Weather. Bill Fitzhugh author of masterpieces such as Pest Control, author Christopher Moore, author of Lamb and other novels have all also mastered this genre.

If I were to rate Boomsday based on its insightful analysis of politics or social trends, or for its well developed characters, I'd only give it three stars. But it is such a hilarious, cynical and entertaining romp through the corrupt swampland of Washington D.C. that I had to give it four.

Christopher Buckley's satirical novel is named after the day when the Baby Boom generation starts to retire. I'm not sure if the word is his invention (and I'm too lazy to Google it right now) or not, but the concept is that younger workers are going to have to pay higher taxes to fund the Boomer's social security checks. Cassandra, the closest thing to a protagonist among the novel's motley array of amoral schemers, is a twenty-nine year old, ex-military PR genius who sets off a near revolution by writing some inflammatory blogs on the issue.

Cass works for a borderline sleazy (well, maybe not so borderline really) PR firm run by a Boomer (everyone in this novel is characterized by their generation, a device that lends itself towards oversimplification, of course) named Terry. During her stint in the army, she became involved with Randy Jepperson (who is constantly reminded that he's no Jefferson), an opportunistic Congressman with presidential aspirations. The three scheme to form a platform that will galvanize younger voters in anti-Boomer anger to vote Randy into the White House. Cass comes up with a rather draconian solution -give Boomer's tax credits if they kill themselves at age seventy.

Boomsday, though obviously a satire, tackles a real issue, though in a rather superficial manner. In this way, it's a bit of a disappointment. The big issues raised by Buckley seem to fizzle out as the novel progresses, reduced to mere fodder for the humor. Yet the book is funny enough that this isn't a total loss. Another criticism is that the characters are not really developed beyond the point of being spokespersons for their generations, causes and lobbies. Oddly enough, the most complex character in the novel is probably Gideon Payne, a fundamentalist Christian preacher who naturally opposes Cass's bizarre solution to the social security problem. While Cass,Terry and Randy spend most of the novel plotting strategy, Gideon goes through something of a moral crisis.

Its rapid pace, funny, snappy dialogue and overall absurdism make Boomsdsay an enjoyable read from start to finish. It's fun in a trashy way, similar to the more entertaining nighttime soaps like Dallas and Melrose Place, where almost everyone is devious and selfish but you can't help but like them anyway. If you have strong political or religious convictions, you might be better off not reading Boomsday. It is likely to offend you, and at best you'll find it trivial and irresponsible. If, however, you are already a total cynic about politics and you like to laugh, I'd definitely recommend it.

Boomsday is a drop dead funny look at one rebellous blogger, Cassandra Devine, and our current dysfunctional Social Security system. Cassandra's solution is simple: Give Baby Boomers government incentives to kill themselves by age seventy-five. Why should that upset anyone? If her father had not blown her Yale tuition on a dot.com start-up, she would've never wound up having sex in a minefield with a U.S. Congressman to begin with. Okay, so she has some anger issues...
This book reminds me of Evelyn Waugh's irreverent book The Loved One, also (recommend). Buckley is hilarious!

DC Harvard Alums Book Club had a mixed reaction to BOOMSDAY. As satire on Washington, many felt that the book hit the mark, while others thought that the jokes got a little old and the story line started to drag. This is not to discount Buckley's ability to paint vivid character portraits that have become such a large part of his style. But as a send up of Washington, some members felt that Jeffrey Frank's THE COLUMNIST provides an even sharper wit and insight into the ways and means of Washington DC. One member suggested that the book was more a "treatment" for Hollywood consideration, than a true novel. Chapters are very short. The story line hops around and when the story advances it does so with a cinematic quality (which is great for movies, but not what novels are suppose to be about). Buckley is an excellent provocateur. While the club discussed his novel for about 30 minutes. The discussion really heated up over the next hour when we discussed end of life issues, social security reform and how club members are dealing/dealt with aged parents. It was a lively discussion, one that Cassandra, Gideon and all the other characters of BOOMSDAY would have enjoyed.

Christopher Buckley's title as the master of the "nothing-sacred" school of satire is as steady as ever with his latest novel, 2007's "Boomsday". But black humor only goes so far without interesting characters or story.

Cassandra Devine is 20-something, beautiful, and has something of a chip on her shoulder. High-profile PR flack by day, Red Bull-swilling blogger at night, she sets in motion a taxpayer revolt like no other. Her target: Baby Boomers about to enter retirement and force working America to pay for their martini-soaked Social-Security-funded dotage. Her recommended solution: Kill them all!

Actually, her recommendation for what she euphemistically terms "transitioning" would work on a voluntary basis, and her actual commitment to the idea, like much else in this book, is left vague. "Boomsday" lacks focus in a lot of ways. It seems to be a conscious revisiting of the theme of his best-known novel, "Thank You For Smoking", with a Washington spinmeister pushing death on the masses. Only this time the story gets away from Buckley rather quickly.

Buckley still crafts engaging prose, presenting Cassandra's central thesis with memorable pungency: "Our grandparents grew up in the Depression and fought in World War Two. They were the so-called Greatest Generation. Our parents, the Baby Boomers, dodged the draft, snorted cocaine, made self-indulgence a virtue. I call them the Ungreatest Generation."

But when you make it past the snarky set ups and whip-smart rejoinders, you find little in the way of a story. Buckley's dialogue works for a while, until you realize everyone has the same clever-preppy voice. Cassandra whines about the mess of her life even as she beds a Senator, lands on the cover of Time magazine, and suffers no fallout from her controversial position. Even the shady boss of her PR firm stands beside her, for reasons never made clear. If this is supposed to make us hate Cassandra's elders for holding her down, it's not working.

Maybe Buckley thought of this, and was aiming to shoot Cassandra down at some point, the way he did "Smoking's" anti-hero Nick Naylor. Only he doesn't pull the trigger. He doesn't resolve her story in any way, nor any of the other subplots here, such as an evangelist who discovers sex, a tech-billionaire who craves a Cabinet post, or a President who uses domestic espionage to extend his unpopular administration. They are instead tossed up for evanescent amusement, then conveniently forgotten.

"Thank You For Smoking" isn't a classic; it's a bit facile and lacks the sense of humanity, however dyspeptic, that marks the work of satirists like Swift or Waugh. But its smart narrative mechanics and Naylor's character arc make it a veritable classic beside "Boomsday's" mentality of "whatever".

Read "Boomsday", if you must, for the relevant argument on Social Security and with the understanding Buckley can, and has, done better.

The basic plot for Boomsday is a great idea and hats off to Christopher Buckley to be prepared to tackle this serious issue. One that's not just for America but any western country with a social security system and a declining birth rate. Currently in the news, we out here in Australia have the two opposing generation camps going at it as the old age pensioners complain they can't live on the, in their words only measly $280 a week government handout. Countering that argument are the younger generation (who won't even have a pension when they reach retirement age and are being forced to save part of their income in an untouchable until they get really old account known as Superannuation). The young generation point out that a lot of them don't even make $280 from paid employment and they will never be able to afford buy their own homes, whilst so the so called struggling retirees go home to their houses now worth at least three quarters of a million dollars that they paid less than a hundred grand for a few decades ago. So I eagerly looked forward to reading Boomsday just to see how Buckley's fictional generation representatives played this very relevant to today scenario out. I have to admit though, I was kind of disappointed.

Don't get wrong there are some great characters in here, none more so than Cassandra Devine a young girl whose dreams were cut short as her father gambled away her college fund on his dotcom business, so even though she got into Yale all she could hope for was that by serving in the military, they would pay her fees years down the track. Cassandra has an encounter with a dim witted politician in a minefield so is forced to take a spin doctor job in the real world. Obsessed with blogging she declares war on what she terms the "ungreatest generation" but who call themselves the babyboomers. She proposes a plan to give incentives for individuals from this generation to kill themselves and remove the burden that is them from society when they reach the age of seventy. What the story really missed though was some great eccentric old people like found in Dave Barry's Tricky Business. Most of the baby boomer characters such as the PR boss Terry and Senator Randolph Jepperson were on the youth viewpoint side. President Peacham although stupid didn't have any eccentric funny characteristics at all. The only babyboomer that did was TV priest Gideon Payne was too much of a loser for you to expect that side of the debate could win. The novel was lighter than other killing off old people novels such as P J Tracy's Live Bait. It did have a fair few funny moments in it but the main problem with Boomsday is that it doesn't have a satisfactory ending. The story is going along and then suddenly there's an epilogue. It's almost as if Buckley couldn't be bothered writing anymore or had no idea how his story was going to end. None of the important issues the book is about are resolved at all by the characters leaving the reader to wonder if the real world can do it all either.

If you like eccentric character fiction also check out authors Carl Hiaasen with his novels such as Stormy Weather. Bill Fitzhugh author of masterpieces such as Pest Control, author Christopher Moore, author of Lamb and other novels have all also mastered this genre.

If I were to rate Boomsday based on its insightful analysis of politics or social trends, or for its well developed characters, I'd only give it three stars. But it is such a hilarious, cynical and entertaining romp through the corrupt swampland of Washington D.C. that I had to give it four.

Christopher Buckley's satirical novel is named after the day when the Baby Boom generation starts to retire. I'm not sure if the word is his invention (and I'm too lazy to Google it right now) or not, but the concept is that younger workers are going to have to pay higher taxes to fund the Boomer's social security checks. Cassandra, the closest thing to a protagonist among the novel's motley array of amoral schemers, is a twenty-nine year old, ex-military PR genius who sets off a near revolution by writing some inflammatory blogs on the issue.

Cass works for a borderline sleazy (well, maybe not so borderline really) PR firm run by a Boomer (everyone in this novel is characterized by their generation, a device that lends itself towards oversimplification, of course) named Terry. During her stint in the army, she became involved with Randy Jepperson (who is constantly reminded that he's no Jefferson), an opportunistic Congressman with presidential aspirations. The three scheme to form a platform that will galvanize younger voters in anti-Boomer anger to vote Randy into the White House. Cass comes up with a rather draconian solution -give Boomer's tax credits if they kill themselves at age seventy.

Boomsday, though obviously a satire, tackles a real issue, though in a rather superficial manner. In this way, it's a bit of a disappointment. The big issues raised by Buckley seem to fizzle out as the novel progresses, reduced to mere fodder for the humor. Yet the book is funny enough that this isn't a total loss. Another criticism is that the characters are not really developed beyond the point of being spokespersons for their generations, causes and lobbies. Oddly enough, the most complex character in the novel is probably Gideon Payne, a fundamentalist Christian preacher who naturally opposes Cass's bizarre solution to the social security problem. While Cass,Terry and Randy spend most of the novel plotting strategy, Gideon goes through something of a moral crisis.

Its rapid pace, funny, snappy dialogue and overall absurdism make Boomsdsay an enjoyable read from start to finish. It's fun in a trashy way, similar to the more entertaining nighttime soaps like Dallas and Melrose Place, where almost everyone is devious and selfish but you can't help but like them anyway. If you have strong political or religious convictions, you might be better off not reading Boomsday. It is likely to offend you, and at best you'll find it trivial and irresponsible. If, however, you are already a total cynic about politics and you like to laugh, I'd definitely recommend it.

Every dictator recognises the power of fear. It's the chief rationale for controlling dissent. Justice for minorities can be shelved. The most blatant acts of government can be excused in the name of "security". This collection of essays by a wide spectrum of lawyers, writers, observers demonstrates how the Bush regime is using fear to consolidate power and undermine the democratic traditions of the United States. It has happened in the past, several of the writers note - the Alien and Sedition Acts of John Adams' administration, the Palmer Raids of World War I and the Japanese herded into concentration camps under the Roosevelt administration. While these events set a precedent, none reached the intensity nor had the far-reaching social impact the current regime has instituted since 2001-09-11.

The various authors examine the historical roots of stifling dissent in the USA. They explain what prompted governmental repressive acts and how these were implemented. Public reaction was usually swift and expressive, if not originally successful. Ultimately, protest and legal action led to disavowal or rejection of the acts or policies. With the Bush regime having declared the "war on terror" to be long-term, if not indefinite, note several authors, the new repression will endure and likely intensify. This presents the public with a new challenge. Even the normal, traditional mechanisms of countering repression have been curtailed, almost without the public noticing. This book, incorporating a variety of political orientations, points up the fact that democracy is more fundamental than party. Rights, the authors stress, are an issue of law, not campaigns. In particular, these essayists note, restricting freedoms to improve security is a false idea.

It is clear from this book that the barrage of unconstitutional declarations by the regime are not instrumental in defeating or preventing "terrorist" activities in North America. These directives and policy statements are designed to impose a reactionary, even dictatorial, social and political structure in the United States. The collection is a warning signal both to residents and citizens of that nation and elsewhere to scrunitise carefully any pronouncements deemed to "increase security". Reference to the "porous Northern border" of the United States in the Introduction is a clarion call to Canadians to read this book and follow events here and in the US closely. With the Bush regime applying pressure on various countries to conform to its methods and accept his dictums, we must maintain a wary eye on our neighbour's intrusions.

While the attempt to gain the widest political and social spectrum of writers and commentators to expose the legal terrorism by Bush and Rumsfeld is laudable, the message here is blurred by repetition. We all agree the WTC attacks were "horrific" but the editors might have applied a thesaurus to reduce the number of times the word is used. The incarcerated men and children at Camp X in Guantanamo have no civil rights, and their legal rights have been curtailed by illegal declarations by the Bush regime. One solidly researched and well-written essay on that topic would have sufficed, even if multiple-authored. The same standard might have been applied to some of the other topics. While it's essential to the survival of democracy to be aware of how Bush, Rumsfeld and the rest are shredding the American Constitution, this collection stumbles slightly in the effort. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

Apparently windbags on the left are as eager to exploit the September 11 tragedy as are their noxiously gaseous counterparts on the right, which, as a progressive, I find distressing. Actually, this book is offensive on several fronts. First off, it is sloppily thrown together, with slipshod, clearly tossed-off contributions from many left-of-center journalists, some of whom (like Michael Moore) tend to speak before they think, thus hurting their cause, however worthy it might be. On top of that, the book becomes redundant, with contributors echoing each other over and over and over again. Better and much less indulgent editing would have helped here. The book's design, too, leaves a lot to be desired (it's downright ugly). The worst offense, though, has been committed by the book's publisher, which crassly released this volume just in time for 9/11's first anniversary, thus proving itself as rapacious as any fly-by-night right-wing press. But then, as I'm sure the authors of this tome would agree, that's capitalism.

Three more copies en route because we vote with our money.
Applauding those who dare to speak when Newspeak
(and goldbergism via scarboroughbot) prevails and reagan
movies are censored by rove-rush-religious-reich-robots
is the least we can do in these times before the pendulum
swings back toward equilibrium of some sort..;>

May the public's awakening, evidenced by book sales
and righteous reactions to lying war-makers, occur in
our lifetimes. May more notice who is on first, who

benefits and where the money comes from and goes to
make media fear its own shadow. These contributors are
a brave lot. Castigated and cartooned by minions of
the rush-on-drugs-daily, they act and speak as if our
beloved country is not already lost. They restore hope.

A wide variety of contributors make this book a useful counter to the rush towards war abroad and away from civil liberties in this country. Some are funny, some tragic, but all the pieces are thoughtful and thought-provoking.

...... is what this country is supposed to stand for. This book clearly shows how these ideals as well as the democracy which made this country great have all been swept under the carpet in the name of 'safety". This book contains numerous articles written by liberals AND conservatives alike, many which review what terrors have resulted in the name of 'tyranny over democracy' throughout history, in this country and in other countries. Terror is a fitting word because there we can see a more subtle yet ultimately just as dangerous form of 'terrorism'. Not only does it effect the thousands of people who have their lives destroyed by injustice, it also jeopardizes all our lives, since we have relinquished our power as Americans to one individual. America IS Americans (remember "by the people, for the people"?), and this book beautifully encompasses this theme. It isn't a question of left-wing or right-wing. Over three thousand people of all political persuasions, all religions, and all ethnic backgrounds died together in the terrible incident on 9/11. Most but not all were Americans. This book enables us to see the myriad ways in which the terror of 9/11 is still continuing. If the America of 'liberty freedom and justice for all' is destroyed, then Bin Laden and his followers have won. What we stand for means nothing if we sweep it under the carpet when it is most needed.

From The Washington Post, 'The Tortured Lives of Interrogators,' June 4 2007.

"Not long ago in Iraq, he felt "absolute power," he said, over men kept in cages. Lagouranis had forced a grandfather to kneel all night in the cold and bombarded others in metal shipping containers with the tape of the self-help parody "Feel This Book: An Essential Guide to Self-Empowerment, Spiritual Supremacy, and Sexual Satisfaction," by comedians Ben Stiller and Janeane Garofalo. ("They hated it," Lagouranis recalled. "Like, 'Please! Just stop that voice!' ") "

Boy, is that some kind of plug...

I paged through this thing while hanging out at a Borders, and it was pretty awful. It seemed like it was written in a day or two, and as some have said, it was probably done just to make some extra cash. Janeane had said in an interview that she didn't really want to do it (there has been tension between her and Stiller for years, recently saying in another interview he tried to get her fired off of Reality Bites), and that her and Ben didn't actually write it together. They wrote their pieces seperately, and sent it to the editors, who tried to make sense out of it. It is a haphazard, lazy outing, and you're better off not reading this tripe at all. Considering Janeane is very articulate and well read, I thought she would be a good writer. She probably is, but working with Stiller probably dumbed her writing down. Stiller may be good at playing neurotic, nerdy characters that make fools of themselves, but he's a rather smug person (a typical Gen X type), and here he shows that's he's a terrible writer. I was never a huge fan of his, and here he just confirms my dislike. If you really want to read something from Janeane, google her numerous interviews (she's done TONS of them, probably the most of any minor celebrity ever). They're better than this "book". The fact that this book is selling used for a penny shows that people aren't as dumb as Ben and Janeane thought they were (or the publishers) when they tried to pass off this crap.

A few of Janeane's chapters have one or two funny moments, but Ben Stiller's are not to be borne.

Almost nothing that Stiller writes has any laughs whatsoever. Even as parody, something should provoke a laugh or a smile.

Awful!

A laugh riot! Me and my brother read this and couldn't stop laughing. A must-read!

I felt this book. Not just felt it, like holding it, I mean you have to hold a book to read it, but what I mean is I loved this book. It helped me get in touch with my inner comedian, the guy inside of me who wants to host a radio talk show and make $10,000,000 starring in a motion picture. Every chapter is hysterically funny. Well, not every chapter. The one by Ben Stiller having a guardian angel who looked like Hoss Cartwright is kind of like a bad sketch comedy bit that goes no where, but everything else in the book is right on and cool, to quote hip seventies language.
I guess it is kind of wierd to be praising a book five years after it came out and everybody else reviewed it five years ago. Okay, so I'm a little behind, but so what? Maybe this book was ahead of its time, maybe its time is now. Maybe Ben Stiller and Janeane Garafolo, Garofolo, Garofalo's time is now. They seem to be doing pretty well, Janeane is doing that terrific radio talk show and Ben is making a movie every other month, and I see all of them. Well, I didn't see the recent one with Jack Black, but that was in and out of the theater in like two days, but I did see "Meet the Parents" twice in the movies and twice on TV, and I'm waiting for the sequel which I have heard Barbara Streisand is going to be in.
Anyways this book has really helped me. It hasn't helped me to sell any of my thirteen screenplays which nobody has bought, but it has helped me to see being pathetic as a source of humor. That's good and amazing. Well, maybe not amazing, but interesting. And believe it or not I finished it in one afternoon, and I never did finish that book by Ellen Degeneris. Maybe, I'll finish that book today and write a review of it.