Book Review: Who Thought This Was a Good Idea?

TITLE: Who Thought This Was a Good Idea? And Other Questions You Should Have the Answers to When You Work in the White House.
AUTHOR: Alyssa Mastromonaco
PUBLISHED: March 2017
CATEGORY: Non-Fiction
GENRE: Memoirs, Politics
PREMISE: Obama's former Deputy Chief of Staff writes about her time in the White House and what it's like to work in politics.
MY REVIEW: I'm honestly not sure how to rate this one. There's nothing really wrong with it. The writing is engaging, it explains things really well, there are some good stories in here. It's just...I feel like the book didn't know what it wanted to be.
Part of it was a memoir, another part of it was life advice. It just kept switching and it was jarring when it would switch. That aspect of the book, I could have done without. But for the most part, I did enjoy it. It just was all over the place sometimes and needed a bit more focus. There were some excellent stories in here about Obama though. Those were fun.
This is one of those niche kind of books, you either are going to be interested in it or you aren't. I was, so I liked it.
WHO SHOULD READ: those interested in politics
MY RATING: Three and a half out of Five funny stories about Obama

Book Review: Divided We Stand

TITLE: Divided We Stand-The Battle Over Women's Rights and Family Values That Polarized American Politics
AUTHOR: Marjorie J. Spruill
CATEGORY: Non-Fiction
PUBLISHED: February 28th, 2017
GENRE: History, Politics
PREMISE: A non-fiction book delving into the 1977 National Women's Conference and how what happened there was a glimpse of future politics to come...
MY REVIEW: I have so many mixed feelings about this book. I do think it's an important thing to read and many people today could stand to read it. But I have issues with the way the author went about presenting the information because it's clear from the way she presented it, that she is biased and wanted you to feel a certain way about things. I HATE when non-fiction history authors do this. If there's something that doesn't have a lot of info and you do have to guess, then okay I get that. But stuff like this? No, just give us the information and let us come to our own conclusions, please.
Namely, she seemed to want you to sympathize with conservative women and admire Phyllis Schlafly. About eighty percent of this book is spent presenting Schlafly and her group as some amazing united force. Meanwhile, she presents the feminists as an unprepared group that spends too much time in-fighting and whatnot. I thought this was weird and then I went and looked up the writer. She's from the south. And most of the books she's written has to do with southern white women and their great deeds. Which, explains a lot.
Look, feminists are not perfect. I am the first to tell you that. But seriously don't sit there and tell me that Shclafly and her group was better. They did everything they could to undermine progress for women simply because they felt they knew what was best for every woman. That is not something to be admired. And I don't think it's very surprising or admirable they were able to organize very well. They all just had one goal. It's easy to agree and get everyone on board when you have one goal. Feminists, have more then one goal, and everyone wants their goal to be at the fore front and focus on that. So of course, we're not all going to agree on everything. Also, I would like to point out, Shclafly's group is also responsible for a lot the negative and frankly untrue stereotypes you hear about feminists today, such as that lie about how feminism is about hating men.
But one thing this book does do well, is it explained the switch of the political parties that took place during the seventies. It does draw very good links between politics now and politics back then. I just...am not pleased with how biased the author clearly was and how she tried to get you to sympathize with people who were actively trying to take away women's rights.
WHO SHOULD READ: Feminists, those interested in political history
MY RATING: Three out of Five flawed takes on history

Book Review: Wolf Whistle Politics

TITLE: Wolf Whistle Politics
AUTHOR: various, edited by Naomi Wolf
CATEGORY: Non-Fiction
PUBLISHED: May 23rd, 2017
GENRE: Essays, Feminism, Social Commentary
PREMISE: A collection of essays, articles written in the past year or so that center around sexism and wolf whistle politics.
MY REVIEW: So this is yet another essay collection. This one is a very quick read, it's less then two hundred pages so it shouldn't take long too read. It's like most collections where some things in it are better then others. This one had a lot of good ones, but also one or two that...where honestly kind of reaching and not really written well.
But there where two that stood out for me. One was the essay where the book gets its title from. That one described what Wolf Whistle politics is and went even further into coded language which I think is something we all need to take a long hard look at. Personally, I feel like coded language is one of the many reasons sexism/racism etc. has managed to survive despite our many efforts to get rid of it. Bigots and sexists got smart and realized they couldn't be up front about their crap anymore and so they started getting more subtle in the way they did things. They do it in such away that lets them go "no no, that's not bigotry/sexism! Because like I'm not directly saying I think you're inferior to me!" but they are heavily implying it. The subtlety also allows for other people to look the other way and pretend it doesn't exist. See all the "Ugh SJWs are so over-sensitive" comments.
The other essay that stood out was one that went into the history of conservative politics and how the Democratic Party and Republican Party basically switched policies/interests in the sixties/seventies. I kind of wish everyone would read this, especially Republicans who like to brag about how they got rid of slavery. Sorry, you didn't. The Republican party in Lincoln's time was incredibly different then the Republican Party of today. Also please don't go acting like this means your party wasn't racist. there were Republicans very much against the abolition of slavery. Just because people didn't want to own slaves, didn't mean they weren't racist.
So this one was a bit of a mixed bag. There were several good essays/articles in here though and I do think the good far outweighs the bad. So if you're looking for some essays to read, this is an interesting one to look into.
WHO SHOULD READ: Feminists, those interested in current events
MY RATING: Four out of Five

Book Review: The Meaning of Michelle

TITLE: The Meaning of Michelle-16 Writers on the Iconic First Lady and How Her Journey Inspires Our Own
AUTHOR: various, edited by Veronica Chambers
CATEGORY: Non-Fiction
PUBLISHED: January 10th, 2017
GENRE: Essays, Social Commentary
PREMISE: A variety of authors write about Michelle Obama and her impact on them and society.
MY REVIEW:I don't really have much to say about this one to be honest. I thought I would, but I don't. It's basically what it sounds like: a Michelle Obama lovefest. Luckily I adore Michelle Obama, so I don't mind this. If you aren't a Michelle Obama fan...you'll likely hate it.
As much as I enjoyed it, I'm not entirely sure why this needed to be a book. A series of articles on a website would have just done the trick. But hey, if the Reagans and Clintons and all of them get a bunch of books about them, why not the Obaamas?
This is a very niche sort of book. Only certain people will seek it out. If you are a Michelle Obama fan, this will be your jam. If you aren't...move along.
WHO SHOULD READ: Die-hard Michelle Obama fans
MY RATING: Three and a half out of Five shrugs.

Book Review: Insane Clown President

TITLE: Insane Clown President-Dispatches From the 2016 Circus
AUTHOR: Matt Taibbi
PUBLISHED: January 17th, 2017
CATEGORY: Non-Fiction
GENRE: Articles/Essays
PREMISE: A collection of articles that the author wrote during his time covering the 2016 Presidential campaign.
MY REVIEW: There's not really much to say about this one. If you kept track of the 2016 election, you likely read at least one of these articles, especially if you're a Rolling Stone magazine reader. It turned out I had read one or two of them when they had been released.
If there is one takeaway from all of these articles it is this: the 2016 election was like no other election I've seen. I mean, I've seen some nutty ones. The last election was pretty bad. I also can tell you stories about the Bush vs. Gore election (the first election I actually paid attention too, but sadly was not old enough to vote in at the time). But even those don't compare to this last one. If there's one thing I appreciate about Taibbi, it is that he calls out the BS on all sides of the aisle. Much as I voted for Clinton, there were several missteps in that campaign (as well as with Sanders, who I also voted for. Sorry Bernie Bros, he was not the perfect candidate you all make him out to be). It's sad to me that an entertainment magazine has some better reporters writing articles on politics then papers like the New York Times do.
I wouldn't really call this entertainment reading. The things that happened during that time and after are just frankly too depressing for me to enjoy remembering it. But there are some important insights here that I think are well worth reading. And worth remembering come next election cycle.
WHO SHOULD READ: Rolling Stone magazine fans, those who want a recap of the election
MY RATING: Three and a half out of Five insightful articles