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.

To me, the two most important points of the book had little to do with the U.S. election. The first relates to Iraqi oil. The few remaining Bush apologists simplify the concept of "war for oil" to mean that if Americans aren't looting the oil and coming home with a barrel under each arm then the war cannot possibly be "about oil". The issue is about CONTROL of oil. The battles between various American factions (neo-con enemies of OPEC vs. corporate friends of OPEC) is as important as any Sunni vs. Shia conflict. Being about oil means being about control means a lot more than just "getting" the oil.

The second is about the levees in New Orleans. It issue is about the levee failure not the hurricane directly. Did the levees failed when they should not have based on the government's effective guarantee of them? It appears the government failed at a responsibility it had taken upon itself. Greg does a good job making the argument that the administration had a fair warning that the levees were not up to the task they had been suggested to be. Also, as they failed, there was time to respond which was ignored. This failure to respond turns out to be to the benefit for many people (both Democrat and Republican). So much time is spent talking about the hurricane. The conservative reply has been to try to focus on the hurricane itself. George Bush cannot be blamed for the weather right? Failing that, blame the people themselves. Failing that, blame state and local officials. And finally failing that blame Brownie (offer up ONE bad guy in the Federal government who maybe have done a little better). All that diverts from the real problem. It was the levees, and it could have been avoided.

Excellent book. Gives a lot of information on what is going on with Iraq and Oil.

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.

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.

Baby Boomers are defined as people (particularly Americans) born between 1946 and 1964, an era when post-WWII and Depression optimism would result in an unusually high amount of births. As of this writing, the oldest Baby Boomers are turning 62 and beginning to qualify for Social Security. As the years go by, the Social Security system will be burdened like never before. Economically, if not dealt with, it could be doomsday, or as Christopher Buckley calls it in his sharp satire, Boomsday.

The near-future United States of Buckley's novel is a country with problems: the economy is seriously floundering and the military is stretched to the point that small countries are declaring war with the U.S. just because they can get away with it. Adding to all this, Baby Boomers are demanding their Social Security payments, leading to a heavy tax burden on younger adults. Cassandra Devine, a public relations wizard by day, runs a blog in her off-hours dedicated to this problem.

At first, her followers indulge in minor rebellions such as destroying golf courses, but soon they are endorsing her modest proposal. With the proper tax breaks, if a portion of the Boomers can be convinced to commit suicide at age 70, the financial crisis will be averted. At first this is considered a nutty idea, but then Cass's friend, the Kennedyesque Senator Randy Jepperson embraces the idea as his opportunity to make it to the Oval Office. Of course, there are plenty of opponents, from the current President to a right-to-life minister to Cass's own estranged father.

As with the best satire, Boomstown is as thought-provoking as it is funny. While few would embrace Cass's solution (even she doesn't; she is really just trying to create debate), it does promote an awareness of a problem in a way that dry economic reports and empty political slogans come short. But most importantly, Boomstown is fun to read. And by succeeding at that level, any provoking-of-thought is a pure bonus.

Buckley writes only half tongue in cheek. No, I don't think he advocates the early death of our senior citizens but he does think that the party will end soon. He is probably trying to goad us to think before (once again) we wait until crisis stage has been reached before addressing the problem. I loved the characters - saucy, sassy, sexy, spunky Cassandra Devine (that name!), the opportunistic Senator and the fumbling, bumbling but ultimately happy Reverend.

Once again, the dialogue is perfect, spot on. The hypocricy of politics is given full coverate, front and center. The Prez typifies this in all his bluster, anger, crass political thinking and that great scene where he cusses like a sailor as the preacher stands there. The story is an easy read and has it all from religion to economics to politics to love. By the end, the reader knows that nothing will be accomplished except band aids. We'll hold on desperately, delaying the inevitable until the whole thing becomes so overweighted it will crash around our heads and THEN that's when it gets interesting. Someone has calculated that my kids would have to pay almost 50% of their income in SS to keep the thing afloat. Good luck, boys, and kudos to Buckley for another witty, irreverant tale.

Boomsday, in a not-terribly-subtle wordplay, refers to the day on which the Baby Boomers will begin to retire and thus overextend our Social Security system. Cassandra Devine, a PR flack and Red Bull-fueled blogger, comes up with a solution: Voluntary Transitioning. Through her plan, Boomers can commit suicide and receive tax benefits. As she sells her idea to the 20-somethings, and then to a Senator with Presidential aspirations who somehow manages to make the idea palatable to the Boomers themselves, it takes on a life of its own. We follow Cass and a few of her antagonists throughout the story, until we reach what feels like a rather rushed ending. There's even an epilogue tacked onto the end. I have to admit that I generally view epilogues as a lazy writer's way of getting out of writing a good solid ending, and the one here didn't change my mind at all.

I enjoyed the book, although I have to admit that it wasn't my favourite of Buckley's work. Both "Little Green Men" and "Thank You for Smoking" are much better, both in terms of their level of satire and their level of humour. In this one, Buckley pulls his punches. In fact, at the end, pretty much everyone comes out on top in one way or another, no matter how corrupt they are or how many stupid things they've done. It wasn't a bad novel, not by any means, but Buckley is capable of so much more.

Since I was first given a copy of "Thank You for Smoking", I've been a close follower of author Christopher Buckley's work. I was less than overwhelmed with his previous two efforts, "Florence of Arabia" and "No Way to Treat a First Lady", but I am big fan of his other works, including "Smoking", and the actually superior "Little Green Men". So I was more than happy to open up Boomsday and give it a shot.

From the prologue onward, Buckley creates a hilarious, near-reality vision of politics in America. The story centers around on Ms. Cassandra "Cass" Devine, a Washington PR flack, who lives in the near future (2011 or so) when the first of the Baby Boomer generation is hitting 65, and Social Security is on the verge of a total collapse that will essentially destroy the American economy and leave the younger generation to clean up the mess. The term "Boomsday" is used to describe the day that those Boomers start collecting their checks and take the rest of America down with them.

In Cass's world, Social Security payroll taxes on those under 35 are hovering around 40%, the prime interest rate is at 18%, and the lawmakers are shovelling more taxes on the young to keep the "wrinklies", as the boomers are called, in gated communities and golf courses. Cass is no stranger to the selfishness of the Baby Boom generation, having her dreams essentially crushed at age 18 by her self-absorbed father. She blogs at night about the unfairness of it all, until one late night, fueled by too many Red Bulls and not enough sleep, Cass posts a "call to arms" for her generation on her blog that gets the attention of the government and lands her in jail. And it gives her the idea for "voluntary transistioning", offering tax breaks and incentives to Baby Boomers to kill themselves at the age of 70 to maek Social Security solvent again. At first dismissed as a crackpot, Cass has an ambitious Senator and her PR-pro boss on her side, as well as millions of angry Under-30's who don't want to pay for their elders mistakes.

This premise launches a tale of Washington manuevering amongst disparate factions, from pro-Lifers to the powerfull Baby Boom lobby, from the Oval Office to K street. It's a tale of how politics makes extremely strange bedfellows and a spot-on satire at just how twisted the system has become. Buckley's sense for Washington politics is perfect, and his off-kilter vision of the way power and policy play in DC is really just a slightly twisted version of the real thing. He has his touge firmly implanted in his cheek, but he also knows enough about politics to get you to think that this is the way things actually happen in Washington. He manages to reference a lot of current or recent political scandals, and takes shots at just about every side of the political divide.

Buckley also does a very solid job by not oversimplyfying the villians or even really making the villians who you thought they were. There is only one clearly awful person in the book, clearly a stand-in for the "me-first" Boomer mentality, but Buckley's caustic wit and keen insight make most of the characters sympathetic in many ways, and the outcome of the book is rather different from how you might picture it. That Buckley arrives there in a logical fashion is a testiment to his talents as a storyteller and humorist.

If I had one complaint it would be that the ending is a bit rushed, but the journey you take to get there is well worth the price of picking this book up and giving it a read. It's audacious, thoughful, and hilarious all at the same time.

This was my introduction to the work of Christopher Buckley, unless you count seeing the movie "Thank You for Smoking", which I really liked. I have been wanting to read one of his novels for quite some time, but just never found the time for satire. Admittedly, he got me with that cover, and the premise sounded interesting.

Thirty pages into it, I was ready to quit. However, I pressed on, as I believe in giving every book and movie a chance to redeem itself. I cannot describe exactly why I was ready to stop reading, but it just didn't feel like it was going to be much fun. Things did get a bit more fun, but the characters became more ridiculous and more deplorable. I felt the lead character, Cass, was an absolute bore. Senator Jepperson did not act OR speak like a senator, even if most of what he was saying was in private throughout the book. Somehow his character faded out as the book went along, which was a mystery as I thought there was a lot of need for character development. And even though the author tries to make the idea of a bill in which baby boomers commit voluntary suicide to relieve the strain on Social Security seem plausible, come on. The President was a filthy loudmouth who has zero redeeming qualities thoughout the book (how did he ever become President?). And then there is Gideon Payne, a sterotypical evangelist who is fat, sweats a lot, and secretly lusts for women. His "change" at the end elicited the biggest groan. Can Buckley not do better than this? Also, the author treats Payne's proposal for a memorial to aborted babies as a very comical idea, but I found nothing funny about this, whether you are pro-life or pro-choice.

With everything I said, the book probably deserves two stars, as it moves at a good pace. The reason why I give it one star is the completely forced and anti-climatic ending. I don't know if satire really has "climax", but it was literally putting me to sleep. The only thing positive about the ending was any chuckling had stopped over 100 pages ago, so why go on? Buckley's other work is probably better, but since there is always such a dearth of negative book reviews on Amazon, it's hard to figure out which to avoid. Therefore, I think I will just avoid them all for now.

Baby Boomers are defined as people (particularly Americans) born between 1946 and 1964, an era when post-WWII and Depression optimism would result in an unusually high amount of births. As of this writing, the oldest Baby Boomers are turning 62 and beginning to qualify for Social Security. As the years go by, the Social Security system will be burdened like never before. Economically, if not dealt with, it could be doomsday, or as Christopher Buckley calls it in his sharp satire, Boomsday.

The near-future United States of Buckley's novel is a country with problems: the economy is seriously floundering and the military is stretched to the point that small countries are declaring war with the U.S. just because they can get away with it. Adding to all this, Baby Boomers are demanding their Social Security payments, leading to a heavy tax burden on younger adults. Cassandra Devine, a public relations wizard by day, runs a blog in her off-hours dedicated to this problem.

At first, her followers indulge in minor rebellions such as destroying golf courses, but soon they are endorsing her modest proposal. With the proper tax breaks, if a portion of the Boomers can be convinced to commit suicide at age 70, the financial crisis will be averted. At first this is considered a nutty idea, but then Cass's friend, the Kennedyesque Senator Randy Jepperson embraces the idea as his opportunity to make it to the Oval Office. Of course, there are plenty of opponents, from the current President to a right-to-life minister to Cass's own estranged father.

As with the best satire, Boomstown is as thought-provoking as it is funny. While few would embrace Cass's solution (even she doesn't; she is really just trying to create debate), it does promote an awareness of a problem in a way that dry economic reports and empty political slogans come short. But most importantly, Boomstown is fun to read. And by succeeding at that level, any provoking-of-thought is a pure bonus.

Buckley writes only half tongue in cheek. No, I don't think he advocates the early death of our senior citizens but he does think that the party will end soon. He is probably trying to goad us to think before (once again) we wait until crisis stage has been reached before addressing the problem. I loved the characters - saucy, sassy, sexy, spunky Cassandra Devine (that name!), the opportunistic Senator and the fumbling, bumbling but ultimately happy Reverend.

Once again, the dialogue is perfect, spot on. The hypocricy of politics is given full coverate, front and center. The Prez typifies this in all his bluster, anger, crass political thinking and that great scene where he cusses like a sailor as the preacher stands there. The story is an easy read and has it all from religion to economics to politics to love. By the end, the reader knows that nothing will be accomplished except band aids. We'll hold on desperately, delaying the inevitable until the whole thing becomes so overweighted it will crash around our heads and THEN that's when it gets interesting. Someone has calculated that my kids would have to pay almost 50% of their income in SS to keep the thing afloat. Good luck, boys, and kudos to Buckley for another witty, irreverant tale.

Boomsday, in a not-terribly-subtle wordplay, refers to the day on which the Baby Boomers will begin to retire and thus overextend our Social Security system. Cassandra Devine, a PR flack and Red Bull-fueled blogger, comes up with a solution: Voluntary Transitioning. Through her plan, Boomers can commit suicide and receive tax benefits. As she sells her idea to the 20-somethings, and then to a Senator with Presidential aspirations who somehow manages to make the idea palatable to the Boomers themselves, it takes on a life of its own. We follow Cass and a few of her antagonists throughout the story, until we reach what feels like a rather rushed ending. There's even an epilogue tacked onto the end. I have to admit that I generally view epilogues as a lazy writer's way of getting out of writing a good solid ending, and the one here didn't change my mind at all.

I enjoyed the book, although I have to admit that it wasn't my favourite of Buckley's work. Both "Little Green Men" and "Thank You for Smoking" are much better, both in terms of their level of satire and their level of humour. In this one, Buckley pulls his punches. In fact, at the end, pretty much everyone comes out on top in one way or another, no matter how corrupt they are or how many stupid things they've done. It wasn't a bad novel, not by any means, but Buckley is capable of so much more.

Since I was first given a copy of "Thank You for Smoking", I've been a close follower of author Christopher Buckley's work. I was less than overwhelmed with his previous two efforts, "Florence of Arabia" and "No Way to Treat a First Lady", but I am big fan of his other works, including "Smoking", and the actually superior "Little Green Men". So I was more than happy to open up Boomsday and give it a shot.

From the prologue onward, Buckley creates a hilarious, near-reality vision of politics in America. The story centers around on Ms. Cassandra "Cass" Devine, a Washington PR flack, who lives in the near future (2011 or so) when the first of the Baby Boomer generation is hitting 65, and Social Security is on the verge of a total collapse that will essentially destroy the American economy and leave the younger generation to clean up the mess. The term "Boomsday" is used to describe the day that those Boomers start collecting their checks and take the rest of America down with them.

In Cass's world, Social Security payroll taxes on those under 35 are hovering around 40%, the prime interest rate is at 18%, and the lawmakers are shovelling more taxes on the young to keep the "wrinklies", as the boomers are called, in gated communities and golf courses. Cass is no stranger to the selfishness of the Baby Boom generation, having her dreams essentially crushed at age 18 by her self-absorbed father. She blogs at night about the unfairness of it all, until one late night, fueled by too many Red Bulls and not enough sleep, Cass posts a "call to arms" for her generation on her blog that gets the attention of the government and lands her in jail. And it gives her the idea for "voluntary transistioning", offering tax breaks and incentives to Baby Boomers to kill themselves at the age of 70 to maek Social Security solvent again. At first dismissed as a crackpot, Cass has an ambitious Senator and her PR-pro boss on her side, as well as millions of angry Under-30's who don't want to pay for their elders mistakes.

This premise launches a tale of Washington manuevering amongst disparate factions, from pro-Lifers to the powerfull Baby Boom lobby, from the Oval Office to K street. It's a tale of how politics makes extremely strange bedfellows and a spot-on satire at just how twisted the system has become. Buckley's sense for Washington politics is perfect, and his off-kilter vision of the way power and policy play in DC is really just a slightly twisted version of the real thing. He has his touge firmly implanted in his cheek, but he also knows enough about politics to get you to think that this is the way things actually happen in Washington. He manages to reference a lot of current or recent political scandals, and takes shots at just about every side of the political divide.

Buckley also does a very solid job by not oversimplyfying the villians or even really making the villians who you thought they were. There is only one clearly awful person in the book, clearly a stand-in for the "me-first" Boomer mentality, but Buckley's caustic wit and keen insight make most of the characters sympathetic in many ways, and the outcome of the book is rather different from how you might picture it. That Buckley arrives there in a logical fashion is a testiment to his talents as a storyteller and humorist.

If I had one complaint it would be that the ending is a bit rushed, but the journey you take to get there is well worth the price of picking this book up and giving it a read. It's audacious, thoughful, and hilarious all at the same time.

This was my introduction to the work of Christopher Buckley, unless you count seeing the movie "Thank You for Smoking", which I really liked. I have been wanting to read one of his novels for quite some time, but just never found the time for satire. Admittedly, he got me with that cover, and the premise sounded interesting.

Thirty pages into it, I was ready to quit. However, I pressed on, as I believe in giving every book and movie a chance to redeem itself. I cannot describe exactly why I was ready to stop reading, but it just didn't feel like it was going to be much fun. Things did get a bit more fun, but the characters became more ridiculous and more deplorable. I felt the lead character, Cass, was an absolute bore. Senator Jepperson did not act OR speak like a senator, even if most of what he was saying was in private throughout the book. Somehow his character faded out as the book went along, which was a mystery as I thought there was a lot of need for character development. And even though the author tries to make the idea of a bill in which baby boomers commit voluntary suicide to relieve the strain on Social Security seem plausible, come on. The President was a filthy loudmouth who has zero redeeming qualities thoughout the book (how did he ever become President?). And then there is Gideon Payne, a sterotypical evangelist who is fat, sweats a lot, and secretly lusts for women. His "change" at the end elicited the biggest groan. Can Buckley not do better than this? Also, the author treats Payne's proposal for a memorial to aborted babies as a very comical idea, but I found nothing funny about this, whether you are pro-life or pro-choice.

With everything I said, the book probably deserves two stars, as it moves at a good pace. The reason why I give it one star is the completely forced and anti-climatic ending. I don't know if satire really has "climax", but it was literally putting me to sleep. The only thing positive about the ending was any chuckling had stopped over 100 pages ago, so why go on? Buckley's other work is probably better, but since there is always such a dearth of negative book reviews on Amazon, it's hard to figure out which to avoid. Therefore, I think I will just avoid them all for now.

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.

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.

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...

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.