Matilda
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-07-06 11:38 PM
Original message |
Has anyone read Mark Crispin Miller's "Fooled Again"? |
|
Edited on Thu Dec-07-06 11:38 PM by Matilda
I'm looking for a book to have sent out from Amazon to an American friend.
This book hasn't been released in Australia so I haven't been able to check it out myself, but I'd love to hear from anyone who's read it.
Would it be a good Christmas present for a Democrat-voting friend?
Edit: sp
|
TabulaRasa
(223 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-08-06 12:21 AM
Response to Original message |
|
MCM's a very bright guy, and a great author.
|
Matilda
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-08-06 02:28 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. Thanks for the recommendation! |
SeattleGirl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-08-06 03:03 AM
Response to Original message |
3. Haven't read "Fooled Again" but did read "The Bush Dyslexicon" |
|
which is a great book. I would like to read "Fooled Again" though.
|
Shadowen
(742 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Dec-10-06 03:00 AM
Response to Original message |
4. I've read Miller's "Bush trilogy", as I call it: |
|
The Bush Dyslexicon, Cruel and Unusual, and Fooled Again.
I enjoyed the Dyslexicon the most, because it was easily the most hopeful, and balanced sourcing, humor, and an almost-narrative style. Cruel and Unusual was, despite his obsessive detailing of his sources, the most emotional and personal of the three--I got the feeling he was trying to be objective and wanted to come to a conclusion based solely on facts, but had a hard time repressing his own rage at the subject. Fooled Again is a bit of a dry read, but only because it relies so heavily on actual facts and figures, rendering it nearly impossible to argue against.
|
LSK
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Dec-10-06 11:29 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Yes it is must reading |
|
I read it last spring and had MCM sign my copy in August.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Mon Oct 06th 2025, 12:25 AM
Response to Original message |