Anónimo

Riveting

Revisado: 01-31-21

I had followed this podcast long before the January 6 insurrection at the Capitol but didn't get around to listening to it till today.
The podcast is riveting (more often than not) and timely.
I knew of Nazi-Muslim connections going back to World War II but wasn't aware of recent crossovers. The United States does have a fascism problem that the Right (#TheReligiousWhite, as I call them) ignore or trivialize. During 2020's BLM protests, Trump and Barr (and their media enablers) focused entirely on the "violent, radical Left" and Antifa, even though all evidence pointed to white nationalists and white anarchists, particularly the Boogaloo Bois.
Whether Muslim or Christian, religious extremists are a threat to liberal democracy, which Republicans turned their back on years ago with the slithering rise of the Tea Party, which was teeming with rage but no capacity to turn raw emotion into productive legislating or governing.
When the mob overtook the Capitol to thwart the Constitution, strip away millions of Americans' most fundamental rights -- to vote, to engage in self-government -- and prop up their charismatic leader who shouts "Lügenpresse!!" daily, those were radicalized Christians, supported by Trump's own evangelical advisers. Americans need to reject the lie that the US is a Christian nation, that "God's law" is supreme, and that certain Christians are sovereigns among us, able to violate laws (including those that ban discrimination) simply because they resent the laws were passed.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

A decent sequel to "The Family"

Revisado: 05-25-19

Compared to the author's previous work, "The Family," "C Street" seems like an addendum, although at nearly nine hours of listening time, "C Street" is far more substantial than a footnote and its content and focus differ from "The Family" to make "C Street" a worthwhile purchase.
(Yes, there is some overlap, but comments exasperated by this are overstated. How could there not be overlap when an author's second topical book follows the original?)
After dealing with background of the C Street residence, residents, and scandals, the book settles down to cover the hypocritical "lapses in morality" (God-forgiven, of course) of three C Street-resident politicians who were so busy with their prayer groups they barely had time to cheat on their wives. Unlike gays' existence, adultery is a sin politicians and constituents can forgive, with careful messaging and great effort to keep financial high jinks to each respective spouse under wraps.
"C Street" covers Mark Sanford most in-depth. Sanford, of course, is famous for disappearing for six days, supposedly hiking the Appalachian Trail but actually in Argentina building memories of his "heart's desire"'s "breasts" and "tan lines," as recorded in letters his wife would later discover. Whoops-a-daisy.
Mark Sanford gave author Jeff Sharlet heaps of information to include in the book; he wasn't as fortunate with the other C Street "prayer warriors" so their inclusion in the book seems off-balance and skimpy in comparison.
I recommend "C Street," after "The Family." It's a good refresher of how naively accepting (even welcoming) most Americans are of Christian supremacists, who are now American fascists with Trump, their charismatic-hero leader, at the helm.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 4 personas

Fantastic story about a fanatical

Revisado: 01-19-19

One might expect a book about judicial history and legal philosophy to be dry, but Hasen's "The Justice of Contradictions" is anything but.
I don't think anyone would doubt that the late Justice Scalia's reputation as the most caustic and divisive (and Schadenfreude-driven, I'll add) is well deserved.
DISCLOSURE: In my opinion, Scalia was Trumpian before Trump became president. He was a wealthy elite who acted as if he was "one of the people," despite lacking empathy for victims of injustice. He was a big mouth with narcissistic traits who had contempt for gays, minorities, and others who were denied due process and equal protection under the laws because the states' tyranny of the majority had decided these groups should be isolated, stigmatized, ostracized, and denied the inalienable rights they should have equally had.
DISCLOSURE TWO (and TOO): "Originalism" is a make-believe judicial philosophy used to cut off discussion when judges and justices like Scalia (and Gorsuch and Kavanaugh and...) have already decided cases' outcomes based on their own biases and political affiliation. By citing "originalism," they can lie to others (maybe themselves too) that they are obligated to rule in a certain way, which is absurd, really, given, as Hasen notes, the great number of times "originalists" disagree on case resolution and the reasons why they came to such a conclusion using "originalist" thinking.
Hasen treats Scalia gently, sincerely asking if Scalia personally despised gay lives or if "originalism" brought him to inequality for gays for purely objective reasons. To me, the answer is the former. Indubitably. Scalia once asked a public assembly of his fans: "If we cannot have moral feelings against homosexuality, can we have it against murder?" His auto-response shows a man -- well-known for his commitment to Roman Catholicism (his son is a priest) -- who gladly tramples the Establishment Clause, wrongly equates sin with immorality, and denies gays' innate dignity and respectability. And his fans, assembled in that room and worldwide, cheer his degradation of gay lives and amplify their own efforts to deny gay rights. Scalia gave them validity.
In his Lawrence dissent, Scalia wrote: "[T]he so-called homosexual agenda, by which I mean the agenda promoted by some homosexual activists directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct."
Also, "Many Americans do not want persons who openly engage in homosexual conduct as partners in their business, as scoutmasters for their children, as teachers in their children’s schools, or as boarders in their home. They view this as protecting themselves and their families from a lifestyle that they believe to be immoral and destructive. The Court views it as 'discrimination.'”
These are the words of a proud bigot who sees gays (and other "unpopular groups") as the rightful victims of religious intolerance and discrimination, not protected by the 14th Amendment, deemed illegal in their very existence by mob democracy. This is a man who defies the knowledge that discrimination based on identity is ALWAYS irrational and should find no quarter in law. Scalia's strong opinion that groups can be rightfully marginalized in democracy, which our nation is not, and their sole recourse is to wait for the blessed day -- if it ever comes -- when the majority finally decides to relieve their oppression.
More subtly than I could, Hasen brings such issues to light and proposes that "originalism" is a conservative ploy to achieve judicial activism without debate.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 3 personas

In God We Trust..All Others Pay Cash.

Revisado: 12-18-18

I had a good time with "Idiot America," partly because Charles P. Pierce seemed quite prescient in foretelling the absurdity of Trump's America.
The candidate who came up short in the popular vote became president (again). Trump got as many votes as he did by appealing to Idiot America, which somehow saw in him a "peer" ("He's just like us!") and "Christian" ("I'll nominate judges who will overrule Roe v. Wade right away!") despite being an amoral billionaire who cheated on all three of his wives, not to mention the US Treasury's general fund of rightfully owed tax payments.
Given the further rise of Idiot American in the 2016 primaries and election and the liberation of the Religious White, adamant it's perfectly appropriate to refuse to arrange flowers for gay customers, and white nationalism, Pierce owes us a sequel.
Pierce and Bronson Pinchot (Balki of "Perfect Strangers") are a perfect match, with the author's sarcasm and wry humor paired with the narrator's timing and dramatic skills.
Two thumbs up!

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 2 personas

Trump is even more inept than I had thought.

Revisado: 10-29-18

I enjoyed this audiobook. Time and again I was dumbstruck by how utterly dumb Trump is. Earlier in his administration, I read a lot of op-eds about how brilliant a strategist Trump is, how he is so calculating he can present a facade of chaos as a means of fulfilling the "Trump doctrine." Those articles didn't ring true, but of course, I had no means of knowing with certainty if they were accurate.
Now I know. Those articles were pure conjecture on their writers' part. Trump is not brilliant. He is petty, hot-headed, impulsive, selfish, self-centered, too stubborn to learn, and too narcissistic to consider listening to his competent aides.
Woodward does a good job of presenting Trump as Trump. Evidently Rob Porter was a source since quite a bit of the text includes Porter being present. I wondered if Steve Bannon was a source too, but of course, there are no attributions to who said what.
The book is a bit heavy on politics but not overbearingly so. To give excruciating details would be out of place because Trump is the central character and he doesn't read anything longer than a page (if said page has illustrations). The book covers what Trump can grasp (or not) in his fleeting attention span. I did fast-forward through one section on Iran because all of the acronyms and names of US and UN agencies got murky, but this part was self-contained.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

One of the greats, with a couple of caveats

Revisado: 03-12-18

"Vulgar Favors" is among the best true-crime books I've ever read/listened to. I recall "the mysterious gay killer" wreaking havoc across the U.S., including where I lived, although his presence in SE New England turned out to be just a false sighting.
The author Maureen Orth takes readers along with her as she crosses the United States, contemporaneously reporting the deaths of Andrew Cunanan's first four victims. No one knew if, when, or where Cunanan was to strike next, but after she heard the news that Versace had been murdered, she was sent by "Vanity Fair" magazine to report Versace's -- and later Cunanan's -- death.
Although I did very much enjoy this book, the text is outdated in its mostly condescending tone regarding gay men. Orth describes gay men as shallow, vain, sex-hungry, drug-using, superficial, body-conscious, lesser-than individuals, who are either rich or money-grubbing. Some of this comes from the places where she did her interviews: Hillcrest (San Diego), Boysland (Chicago), South Beach, and San Francisco present a very narrow view of "a gay" (Orth's term, which is really bad phrasing; gay men never say, "Hi! I'm a gay!"). I would hope that if she were to revise the text one day, she would reconsider her judgmental categorization of gay men.
Also, Orth refers to Cunanan's case as the most bungled criminal investigation in U.S. history. That is not true. Here's just one example: the investigation into the Charles Manson family's killing spree was so disjointed that in hindsight it's amazing the defendants were found guilty, nevermind (originally) sentenced to death.
But -- despite these flaws -- I still recommend "Vulgar Favors" as engrossing and time well spent.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 11 personas

Narrator ruined this book for me.

Revisado: 02-24-18

I made it through the beginning of chapter 5 before giving up in frustration.
The narrator ruined this book for me. He spoke with such staccato, interrupted by unnecessary and distracting pauses, that following the narrative arc was too burdensome.
I don't mind struggling with a book's concepts or stances that differ from mine, but when the narrator is the primary obstacle to enjoying a book, it's time to throw in the towel.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Would've listened to the whole book with no breaks

Revisado: 02-24-18

Sharkey's "Above Suspicion" is a mesmerizing true-crime book that so engulfed me I would have listened to the entire book with no breaks if I had the time to do so.
Cashman as narrator is great too, using the ranges of pitch and volume in his voice to portray several characters' words.
Be sure to listen to the epilogue to learn what happened after Sharkey completed the first edition of the book. His updates make the book even more poignant.
Very much recommend!

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 1 persona

Classic Sedaris

Revisado: 01-26-18

I've been a David Sedaris fan for years, and the updated "Holidays on Ice" delivers.
I had the original audio book already, but, with Audible's January 2018 sale offering the revamped "Holidays on Ice" for $2.95, purchasing the book was an easy decision.
At his best, Sedaris' writing is dark, unconventional, and -- yes -- funny. Take him for who he is, not what you want him to write.
By far, Sedaris was the best narrator. His sister Amy Sedaris was okay. But someone else really should have narrated "Season's Greetings to Our Friends and Family!!!" I'll be like Thaddeus Bristol, a character in another story, and say that woman just doesn't sell it.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 1 persona

I made it to chapter 6 ... .

Revisado: 01-26-18

I really wanted to like this book because the lives of President T. Roosevelt and Mark Twain fascinate me.
But -- I had to give up.
Kinzer, the author, seemed to create this book (well, the first six chapters anyway) in a copy-and-paste manner. It's just quotation after quotation. Between quotes, Kinzer added what could be considered transitions, if they worked well, which they didn't.
As a professor, I get annoyed when students use this writing style: a three-sentence quote from this article, a four-sentence quote from that article. They're not plagiarizing; everything is properly cited. But it shows little original thought.
I find reading -- and listening -- to long-quote/transition/long-quote/transition/ad-nauseam very frustrating.
The narrator was great, but, for me, he couldn't save this audio book.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 1 persona