Rating: 
Summary: exceptional work - hilarious and a call-to-arms
Review: First of all, please note that many of the 1 star reviews are identical or subtle variations on the same exact paragraph. If this person would put down his or her ideological hammer and actually read the book, they would recognize that their criticism is utterly off base.I think there is reasonable basis for criticizing Franken's relentless positivity about Clinton - as someone wrote above, Clinton did a great job, but was also the beneficiary of great historical circumstances. That said, the truth-be-damned conservative media has been dealt a knockout blow; someone who truly believes in conservative principles ought to be ashamed that their vision for the world has been so thoroughly corrupted and used for such venal by Hannity and his gang. I thought this was going to be comedy, but its biggest impact comes from the overwhelmingly powerful analysis of the truth behind the lies. And, unlike the "no spin zone," Franken provides footnotes and examples for every one of his claims. Incredible work. I am buying the rest of his books immediately.
Rating: 
Summary: Sometimes subtle, always oddball, but not hypocritical.
Review: First of all, the book has a lot of merit on humor alone. Even if you completely disagree with Franken, there are a few chapters that you can't help but laugh at. The difficulty in a book like this, then, is trying to fit the humor in with the serious political commentary. Sometimes it's hard to tell what's serious and what's not, and, in fact, the first time I ever read a book by him, I was left thinking he lied all the time. It really seemed to undermine his intent, which was to dissect various ideological opponents of his, often by accusing them of lying. As I read more of his work and gave it more thought, I got to where I could pretty routinely tell when he was kidding around and when he was being serious. There are three types of lies he tells. The first is a sort of dramatization lie, where what he says is basically true but he takes a little license in the telling so that the story is funnier. You can't always tell when he's doing this, but that doesn't really matter because it's tangential to the point he's making. The second sort of lie is really obvious. He might claim, for example, that Rush Limbaugh has a gay younger brother that he used to beat up as a kid (to my knowledge, he has never claimed this). These sorts of lies are generally obvious and used purely for cheap laughs (he usually adds disclaimers to them, in fact). The third type of lie is more subtle. Often he'll give an example of something he's been talking about within his work. In one chapter, he talks about a technique some people use to mislead their readers, and then actually does it himself right there. He does it nowhere else in the book, so clearly he's using it as a sort of subtle tool to further deride the person he's making fun of and illustrate how underhanded the technique is. In any case, it is easy to mistake these sorts of "lies" for the sorts of things he accuses his opponents of, but if readers keep his tone and intent in mind, they should never accuse him of hypocrisy.
Rating:
Summary: To the reader from SF . . .
Review: First of all, the guy's name is Mr. Griffith, not Mr. Arnold. Obviously you CAREFULLY read Mr. Griffith's post. I'll address your points one by one: 1. You said Mr. Griffith stated that the Republican party controls the media. That isn't what he said. Obviously you CAREFULLY Mr. Griffith's post before mouthing off. 2. You railed about Mr. Griffith's comments regarding church and state and capitalism and a free society etc. Your comment here makes no sense in regard to the point he made. He was commenting that he agreed with Al Franken's contention that the so-called Christians who advocate such things as supply side economics that help the rich and hurt the poor are, in fact, very un-Christian. Such people, if they truly wanted to see the manifestation of the word of Christ in the world, would be advocating polices and programs aimed at helping poor people, not gaining further tax breaks for people who are already filthy rich. 3. You said the only allies we upset were those who had an economic interest in Iraq. Wrong. Check the facts on that one. You will find a great many countries that had no economic interests in Iraq were opposed. But even if they did, how does that make it unacceptable for them to freely choose to avoid participating in an UNNECESSARY war? A clear headed reading of Mr. Griffith's statement is that he agrees with Franken's contention that it is hypocritical and morally reprehensible for people who evaded military service to start an unnecessary war and send others to die in it. He didn't even mention that they used lies and deceptions as an excuse to start that war, which makes it even more reprehensible. Mr. Griffith did not say he felt it was fine that Clinton did not serve either. He was merely commenting on the present situation. I too agree that it is stomach turning that many of the top military advisors of the country, as well as both the President and Vice President, who evaded military combat service themselves, have started an unprovoked war which is throwing this country into an economic crisis and killing hundreds of kids (with no end in sight). Check your FACTS sir, before posting. That is point of Al Franken's book.
Rating:
Summary: A Great Read
Review: First of all, this book is VERY funny! I just read "Dude, Where's My Country?" by Michael Moore but his humor doesn't come off as witty and infectious as Al Franken's. I was seriously laughing out loud to this book! He does an amazing job at pointing out all the lies the right-wingers have told but at the same time is honest about the left. The difference between Al and Ann Coulter is, Al is honest, smarter, funny and frankly better looking than she is. As far as books go, I enjoyed Michael Moore's "Dude, Where's My Country?" more because he writes with more passion. But Al's book does what it sets out to do and that is correct the lying liars.
Rating:
Summary: Brilliant AND insightful. Conservatives, you've been exposed
Review: First of all, unlike many of the ONE STAR reviewers, I actually read the book. You should do the same, or is that beyond your capabilities? Among the many topics Franken covers are: • Fox News' right-wing bias
• Ann Coulter actually IS a nut case
• Bill O'Reilly IS a conservative (and a creep)
• Hannity and Colmes is a sham debate program
• The myth of a Liberal media
• Dubya and his whole administration are liars
• Bush's policies make the wealthy wealthier (and screw over the poor and middle class)
• and much, much more! All with humor and a relentless persuit of the facts (Team Franken, take a bow). Plus a short novel (Operation Chicken-hawk), Supply-Side Jesus, a one-act play, this book should be read by all Americans. Especially the ONE STAR people!
Rating:
Summary: This is for jimmy361's review.
Review: First of all, you need to actually read the book. Your whole arguement told me that you didn't even read the book. And, two: Go back to high school and refresh your grammar skills. They need some help, now!
Rating:
Summary: Not only true, but very entertaining
Review: First off I don't claim to be Liberal or Conservative, Democrat or Republican so I am not taking sides here. I think I laughed more while reading this book than I have at the last ten years of Saturday Night Live. Al franken is what Rush Limbaugh wishes he was: witty, well researched, intelligent...How come none of the Democrats are man enough to stand up against this Troglodyte we have in the white house? It takes books like this one to Shed some light on what is really going in this country. How did we go from the most prosperous time in our country to where we are now so quickly? Read this book and find out. This is one of the best books I have read in recent years. Unless you believe everything President Shrub and Rush limbaugh tell you you may still have a chance to break away form the undertow this administration is throwing us into. READ IT!!!
Rating:
Summary: A stunningly billiant indictment of the "right"
Review: First off I'd like to thank FOX News Corporation for suing Al Franken and Dutton to change the title of this book, because otherwise I may not have realized it existed. Thank you, FOX! As it was, I made a point of buying it immediately after reading the article about the lawsuit, which FOX lost, BTW. Let's start with the title. This book is not meant to be any more "fair and balanced" than Fox news is, which should tell you a lot right there. It is meant to be, and succeeds brilliantly, at being an exhaustively documented, meticulously prepared indictment of the lies (yes, just plain ol' lies) the "right" regurgitates into the public discourse. Franken skewers everyone with the deserved venom that perhaps only an accomplished satirist can bring to bear. But don't feel sorry for them -- they deserve it. Their calculated lies, boorishness, coarseness, bullying tactics and lack of civility make them fair game. (You may be shocked at what some of these self-proclaimed "Christians" do and say. . . although, then again, you may not.) I suppose the wounded howling will begin soon from the "right" about how they've been so unfairly mistreated here. . . well, no worse than they treated anyone on the left, the only difference being that Franken isn't lying. But that's the way bullies are. Fair warning: although the laughs are plentiful, this book is nowhere near as light-hearted as "Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot and Other Observations." If anything this book will make you sad that this class of people have actually gained power and a modicum of respectability...
Rating: 
Summary: I want the time I spent reading this drivel back
Review: First off let me preface this by saying that Al Franken was one of the least funny people on Saturday Night Live (in my opinion). So I hesitated to read this book because frankly he puts me to sleep when I see old SNL re-runs of him talking into the mirror. But, since I consider myself a pretty open-minded person I gave him the benefit of the doubt. Plus I wanted to see what all the hype between him and Bill O'Reilly was about. Franken comes off as really bitter and nitpicky. To be honest if this is satire, he should really find a new line of work because this one isnt working out for him. I have yet to read his "Rush is a big fat idiot" Book, but after reading this I really cant see the point. If you are an angry Liberal then this might be your book. However If you are someone that doesnt lean on either side of the aisle then dont read this because this guy is blatently one sided and intellectually dishonest on many points. I have watched Bill O'Reilly and read "Who's looking out for you". I have also watched franken and read this book, and its just my gut feeling that O'Reilly is much more entertaining, and informative. Plus O'Reilly's book seemed to have a usefull purpose where this book was just smear with better research. This is just another "Gotcha" book, and honestly, how many times have we misspoke in our lives?
Rating: 
Summary: A moderate reviews Mr. Franken
Review: First off, Al Franken is a very smart guy and a very funny comedian. I have always enjoyed his appearances on SNL, Conan O'Brien, The Daily Show, etc. Franken is also an unabashedly liberal political commentator. While I respect his right to say what he wishes, and he makes a few good points with a fair dose of humor, I had just a few problems with the book. Now, I am by no means a right-winger. My conservative friends call me a liberal and vice versa, so I guess I'm a moderate. I have problems with the Democratic Party, so I don't support the so-called liberal agenda. I consider myself a true liberal, in that I favor change to our society. I also have problems with the Republican Party, so I don't call myself a conservative. I have liberal leanings on many issues, in any case, and I am somewhat disenfranchised by the Bush administration over the war in Iraq. That said, I don't believe that any of this is Bush's fault. He did say that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq that don't exist, and his administration must pay the price. Nevertheless, there is no evidence that Bush knew it was a lie, he was trusting a rather unctuous group of used-intelligence salesmen (that should have been sacked immediately after the incident). The fact that there were no high-level firings in the CIA as well as repeated spinning by the administration have led to all sorts of backlash, some of it deserved. However, for Franken to prove his argument that Bush is a liar, it would seem necessary for him to prove that Bush definitely knew there were no WMDs in Iraq. He cannot, because Bush did not know. Thus, the argument falls flat. It seems that every liberal project must have an attack on our nation's president, whether or not it is warranted. 'W' trusted the wrong people, that is all. He should be held accountable, but, as tempting as it is to blame him, it is impossible. His tirade against Ann Coulter similarly seems rather insipid. All journalists will occasionally misquote somebody or make some other factual mistake. They are only human, and I am sure that Mr. Franken has, at least once, done the same. As long as the journalist in question issues a retraction, I have no grudge against said individual. It is interesting that Bill O'Reilly is one of Franken's targets here, because O'Reilly is generally not considered a conservative. He is against the death penalty, pro-choice and for gun control. Perhaps the only reason he is lumped in here is because he often expresses dislike for dogma-spouting liberals (as well as far right reactionaries). We keep hearing from liberal mavens about how he says his upbringing was more humble than it was, which might be true. The fact that it is included here is disappointing, because it is definitely not an original story (Franken owes this to the Slate online magazine). He also claims that there is no liberal bias in the media. While this is more true than it was five years ago, it is not necessarily true yet. Aside from Fox News, liberals control all the major TV News outlets. Most of the newspaper media is controlled by liberals. True, conservative books and radio programs are very influential, but there is no monopoly there, either. Perhaps Franken means that the amount of territory controlled by both is about equal, which I would grant, but there still exists a liberal bias in the TV and newspaper media (and a conservative one on the radio). Ultimately, Franken makes plenty of good points. Many of the conservative commentators in this country bug me. He was ahead of his time in regards to Rush Limbaugh. Unfortunately, the purpose of this book is not to persuade. It is to preach, mainly to the choir. Instead of genuinely trying to show the problems of the American Right in an evenhanded manner, he just ends up spewing incendiary polemic. The only difference between this man and liberal demagogues like Michael Moore is that Franken believes in reason and substance rather than inflamed emotions, he seems genuinely interested in making a solid case, and for that reason, the book is able to stand on its own. One must wonder, however, how the liberal faction is going to expand in the coming years if it remains this exclusive.
|
