Friday, March 2, 2012

Stars Not Applicable

I haven't read Bill O'Reilly's new book, "Killing Lincoln", and I probably never will (nothing against Mr. O'Reilly but, if I want to read an historical book, I'd probably want to read one by an, you know, ACTUAL historian; David McCullough, Douglas Brinkley, etc.). But you know what else that I'm probably not going to do? I'm probably not going to waste valuable moments of my life writing a negative review of it on Amazon just because I happen to think that Mr. O'Reilly is a dick. Nope, folks, THAT I'm going to save for the multi-handled stooges and miscreants of the world. I mean, it is in fact their frigging freak-show/domain, correct?

9 comments:

The Honorable, Esteemed And Distinguished Judge Dervish Sanders (A High IQ Individual) said...

I heard it was historically inaccurate. You don't believe it deserves a negative review for that reason? You think the only reason someone would negatively review it is because they're a "stooge" or a "miscreant"?

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

My point was that you shouldn't write a review of a book that you haven't actually read. If you have read it and had some issues with it, yes, by all means, critique it.

Rusty Shackelford said...

I read Killing Lincoln...thought it was pretty good.O'Riellys co-author is a historian.The book was a gigantic best seller.

This fall he has Killing Kennedy coming out.

The Honorable, Esteemed And Distinguished Judge Dervish Sanders (A High IQ Individual) said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
The Honorable, Esteemed And Distinguished Judge Dervish Sanders (A High IQ Individual) said...

Rusty: I read Killing Lincoln... thought it was pretty good.

For a work of fiction? But the authors (O'Reilly and the "historian") aren't presenting it as a work of fiction. According to them it's nonfiction. When a "nonfiction" book is as historiaclly inaccurate as this one, I don't know how anyone could say it was at all "good".

So what if it sold a lot of copies? That just proves there are a lot of dumb people out there willing to believe something just because it comes from a television personality they like (because he represents their partisan point of view). His co-author should be embarrassed to call himself a historian.

BTW Will, people on both sides of the aisle review political books on Amazon that they haven't read.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

And both sides of the aisle need to be a lot more careful.

Rusty Shackelford said...

Damn WD,O'Reilly is another person gaming the system to become a very rich man.

Is'nt there something you can think of so you could join the club.I dont think its going to happen peddling movie score CD's.

The Honorable, Esteemed And Distinguished Judge Dervish Sanders (A High IQ Individual) said...

Rusty: O'Reilly is another person gaming the system to become a very rich man.

Probably, although this isn't an example of that. What it is an example of is a "celebrity" using his fame to sell a book that would otherwise have been turned down and never published. There already are a LOT of Lincoln books. The last thing the world needs is a historically inaccurate one.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Paul Krugman could stand to take a history course, too. The dude idiotically compared Herbert Hoover to Speaker Boehner recently. I mean, duh!!!