Just a little something to make you feel even MORE disgusted with life. We have a book that doesn't just take the thinking out of a logical debate, but tells you WHAT To THINK And have a look at the table of contents if you wish to induce further[url=http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0977227901/ref=sib_dp_pop_toc/002-7608553-6424866?ie=UTF8&p=S00B#reader-link] vomiting:
[/url]

...
Someone call Bun-bun and tell him that these people are telemarketers.
Then call Oasis and tell her that they work for hC.


(Just a reminder, emoticons shouldn't be used to replace character names -- KB)

Actually, I have to give the author some kudos for being able to, apparently, hit on an issue for every letter of the alphabet. Okay, some are kind of a stretch, but, still, that couldn't have been easy.

And honestly, I'm tempted to get it, if only to see what it has to say.

It's the same tired lies every other soulless right wing shill cranks out. If that amuses you, and you get a chance to read the book for free, then have a ball.

But if you absolutely must spend money on this kind of blather (because you lost a bet or some such), then at least wait a week for it to hit the $1.99 remainder shelf with all the other unsellable fascist tomes. That way the author will get nothing, and won't be encouraged to try again.

Just a brief glance at the first few pages (the second link lets you read at least part of the book for free) shows the nature of the book.

Each chapter begins with a list of "claims". They appear, one and all, to be sound bites supporting the liberal side of the issue. Not a single one is a fundamental philosophical or legal argument.

This book is neither more nor less than a pamphlet for training spin doctors; it directs the reader to counter statements, redirect the argument to non-essentials, and pull it into blind alleys of definition, religion, and rhetoric.

edit: wow... only 6 pages into a 437 page book and already we see Godwin's Law in action.

You know. Its not the spin-covered bull-leavings that I'm sick of. Nor is it the conservative point of view. That has plenty of merits to it. Rather, (from looking at the cover of the book on Amazon) it is the wrapyourselfintheflag, false patriotic image that both sides love to espouse. The founding fathers, for what a bunch of dead men are worth, thrived on the debate, on the intellectual uncertainity. Not on groupthink
We love to proclaim ourselves to be true Americans, no matter our political orientation. However, were the men who wrote the Constitution to see this country today, it would be unrecognizable to them. Say what you want, but please don't have your only defense of your viewpoints be sound-bites and patriotic banners. No matter your country.

The audience for books like these are people who are absolutely certain that they are right, and yet need a book to tell them why.

no kea, its so conservatives have something to beat the liberals over the head with, both figuratively and literally

you think i'm joking but i'm serious

You know what the problem with Godwin's Law is? It makes it impossible to make comparisons when they are genuinely valid and sound.

Its a book to match soundbite to sound bite. Anyone who truely wants to talk/debate politics is not going to quote this. And frankly, soundbites are all the politics that a lot of people get.

I do it all the time.

As long as the comparisons are clearly sound and non-rhetorical, reasonable people aren't going to scream "AAARGH! Godwin's Law! Godwin's Law!" But you can't just say "You're a Nazi!" or "Hitler built highways too, so highways are TEH EVIL!"

"I laughed, I laughed, I laughed some more then I use it to wipe my..."

"A humourous collection of random mumbling by a deranged mental patient, Its great to see more mentally challenged writers these days"

"If you don't buy this book, The terrorists have won!"

"If you buy this book, The terrorists have won!"



And highways are the evil! I swear, they're all being built in a giant satanic rune that will cause suffering and misery in texas.

No, the highways are safe; the rune is what DeLay's old district was gerrymandered into...

Well, if you've read Good Omens you know that's certainly a possibility.

That is a beautiful way of describing it, Kea. May I quote you?

I expect that there are examples of this kind of book from all points of the political compass, but it points out the usefulness of an obvious schism between major political forces.

People who have looked more closely at this book than I have say that it contains no reasoned arguments or debate, merely sound-bites. I see this as part of the ever-more-pronounced lack of actual political discourse that is set before the icecream-licking public. Soundbites are what we are fed whilst the actual governing of the country is done well out of sight.