The Bestseller You Never Heard Of

[BlackCat]

Oh, that makes sense

[Kuciwalker]

I was happy never having heard of this crap.

[Agathon]

I don't think this is a big deal. What's stranger is the relative silence on the claims made by a Serbian newspaper that Radovan Karadzic had been living under the protection of the USA and the document they pubished, which they claimed was a record of the agreement.

Or the fact that John Edwards seems to have been spraying his DNA around rather liberally (admittedly, it's the National Enquirer, but Edwards didn't help his own case by seeking refuge in a public lavatory when confronted about it).

[chequita guevara]

So much for the "liberal media."

[Kuciwalker]

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Lancer
Fairness! That's what I love about that author, what's his name. I mean he also wanted JFK tried for murder for getting us involved in Vietnam and doing the whole Bay of Pigs thing, right? I mean he wrote a book on that too, yes?

Actually, Buglisoi wasn't admitted to the bar until the year after JFK was assassinated. Besides, JFK just sent in...ahem..."advisors" to Vietnam. It was the LBJ administration that fabricated the Tolken Gulf incident in order to fool Congress into giving him authorization to use "all necessary force."

No Americans died at the Bay of Pigs. It was entirely an internal Cuba conflict between the opressive Communist overlords and our freedom-loving proxy army. And for the most part, Kennedy didn't lie. He quickly fessed up that he was behind it (although Ike set it up.) Kennedy's only "untruth" came on D minus 1, when he announced there were no plans to invade Cuba.

[Theben]

Is anyone even surprised that Bush is scum at this point?

[Zkribbler]

Scum, no.
Claimed to be a murderer by a celebrated prosecutor, with a 21-for-21 conviction rate in murder cases (including Charles Manson): yeah, I'm surprised.

[rmsharpe]

The Worst Seller You've All Heard Of

[rah]

I don't see where that 21 for 21 means anything here.
One is for fighting in court discussing/proving points of law,
while his writing is supposed to be entertainment good enough to make money. How the reader votes is unimportant as long as he paid his money to read it.

[Zkribbler]

21 for 21 indicates he is a good prosecutor, not some imbicile with delutions of adequacy.

The reviews on Amazon.com are amusing. This is either the greatest most logical, systematic book ever or else a total piece of crap.

[rah]

I still don't see how that means anything. They are unrelated. Being a good prosecutor does not mean he's a talanted writer or factual for that matter.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by rah
I still don't see how that means anything. They are unrelated. Being a good prosecutor does not mean he's a talanted writer or factual for that matter.

I haven't read anything by him, but I'm guessing he's good:

Mr. Bugliosi has written three No. 1 best sellers and won three Edgar Allan Poe awards, the top honor for crime writers.

[rah]

Yes he's probably an entertaining auther (three no. 1 best sellers) I can see a corrolation there. Sells a lot of books so he's probably a good writer.

But he's a successful prosecutor = what he says must be truth. No corrolation.

[snoopy369]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
Scum, no.
Claimed to be a murderer by a celebrated prosecutor, with a 21-for-21 conviction rate in murder cases (including Charles Manson): yeah, I'm surprised.

You're a lawyer, aren't you? And you're still saying this

21 for 21 means he doesn't do murder cases very often. I'd guess he picks and chooses the 21 he thinks he will win ... I'd be willing to bet my mother would out-prosecute him any day, because she actually tries cases that aren't guaranteed wins, and wins them often enough to be impressive... but the police screw up often enough that you won't get a 100% conviction rate without absurdly good luck, even on a small sample size like that.