Teaches you to efficiently hate the author
348766
Had to read this for an operations management class. People like it because Goldratt tries to make the subject relateable and interesting. Instead, he makes me realize how much I dislike Goldratt and his terrible metaphors. He also tries making things way too dramatic between a failing business, failing marriage, and I can't even remember, a hyperactive son? No, very bad. You don't have to be crazy dramatic to teach a lesson.
2743883
I average about a book a week and I cannot remember ever disliking an author so much.

Kati's only love story is the one she conducts with herself. Could she be more self-promoting? Name dropping? Self congratulatory? Look -she married two men infinitely more successful and climbed on their backs to cobble together a career (oh and cheated on them both while doing it). And that is the sum total of her achievements?

I'm angry with myself for buying this book and for wasting my time reading it.
1716590
A poor cover for venting the author's hatred towards Barak Obama
4365791
I give credit to the author for raising my awareness of a real and serious issue, but that is where my compliments end.  I watched the film Collapse, and then I read the book.  The film is short and gets straight to the point.  The book is painful and irritating to read for the following reasons:

1. The author repeats the same information several times throughout the book.  If you removed the repeats, you could probably slash several pages out of this book.  We got the idea the first time, please stop repeating it.
2. The author likes to quote himself from his earlier works several times throughout the book.  Irritating.
3. The author likes to make a point by continuously saying, I predicted that way back in 2001.  Who cares to hear this over and over again throughout the book?  Who does he think he is, some kind of an arrogant prophet?
4. The author comes off as presumptuous in the sense that he is arrogant, cocky, and audacious.
5. The author declares himself to be a great leader and compares himself to the likes of Lincoln and Thomas Jefferson.  Wow, did he really print that?  Yes he did.
6. The book seemed largely unorganized.  It's like he's rambling.  It's a real mess.
7. There seems to be a proofreading issue with the book.  The spell checker may have selected incorrect words in a few areas in the book.
8. I really have to question some of his sources, charts, and graphs.
9. His 25-point program for action seems to reflect his arrogance, and I think he could find better ways to win support from his audience.  He just comes off as a jerk.

Overall, I would have to say that it is better to skip the book altogether and just watch the film.  You're not getting much more out of the book.  The film will give you the basics of a real problem.  For reading, my suggestion is to find another author to expand your knowledge of Peak Oil.
880314
This book would be quite funny if it weren't so frustrating. Author Susan Jacoby accurately depicts the sorry state of intellectualism in America and properly castigates the "videoization" of the culture. Baby Einstein videos are one particular, and particularly deserving, target of her wrath. But time and time again, Ms. Jacoby is guilty of the intellectual sloth she accuses "conservatives" of.

She (correctly) condemns conservatives for being close minded, but then shamelessly insists that the views of conservatives (i.e. Creationism) should be dismissed out of hand and given no hearing. She criticizes conservatives for name-calling and mischaracterization of their opponents, but she routinely does the same to religious conservatives and others with whom she disagrees.

But what ultimately annoyed and infuriated me to the extent that I had to give up on the book was Ms. Jacoby's bloodthirsty anti-intellectual statism and historical revisionism. She spends pages correctly evaluating the public schools as a mess, but then blames their sorry state on a lack of federal control. You see, the simple "folks" (a word she quite wittily assails) in the South and Midwest cannot be trusted to fund and operate their own centers of learning -- they need an Imperial government in Washington, D.C. to do it for them! And of course, a president like George W. Bush could never be elected again in this fantasy, I would suppose.

Tellingly, Ms. Jacoby evidences a horrible misunderstanding of American history, particularly the views of the Founders, which can only be achieved by a statist public education. You see, in Ms. Jacoby's perverse world of anti-truth, federally-funded public education was always part of the Founders' plans -- or at least the "good" ones. Sadly, those dastardly "conservatives" foiled the centralist plot. She laments that the uneducated and illiberal George Washington's attempt to posthumously establish a national(ist) university was foiled -- not by laissez-faire classical liberals in her contention, but by religionists who were wary of government supplanting their role in education. You see, to Ms. Jacoby, the Founders were all secularists with a 1965 view of the First Amendment -- despite the inconvenient truth that several states had official state religions at the time of the Constitution's ratification. She also firmly believes that the Founders were for "democracy," when in truth, the word was an epithet in the Founding Era. This shoddy scholarship abounds and firmly establishes Ms. Jacoby as an anti-intellectual herself.

The only thing this book succeeded in doing for me was demonstrating, once and for all, that the Secular Left is as statist and anti-intellectual as the Religious Right. Susan Jacoby's religious faith in the federal government and centralized political dictatorship is just as idiotic as fundamentalist Christianity. Maybe even more so.
144385
How does this jerk and his publishers get away with it?  Dan Brown's books are so apallingly researched and error-ridden that it really is an insult.  I'm not driven by any ideology, nor am I pedantic - but it's the writer himself who pretentiously claims the details in this book to be "fact" in the preface.  I find it impossible to enjoy a book when every page is riddled with simple error.  For goodness' sake, "My First Book of Art" or a simple map of Rome is all you need to find them!  As for the so-called "Art Expert" (Robert Langdon), he has got to be the the most ignorant art teacher on the face of the planet.  I'm insulted by such blatant disregard for accuracy, and depressed by the low standards of the reading public.
4348922
The material for the most part was fine. Chapters weren't too long but OH MY GOD would the author not shut up about her damn personal life! It's a friggin textbook, not your facebook status! Constant references to her dumb kids, and even dumber grandkids, and oddly passive aggressive jabs at people she went to elementary school with. If you're reading this, Kathleen Berger: I HATE YOU.
1133765
The author should, first of all, avoid any plot that involves legal matters.  In another book, she included a private judge, without understanding how that concept works and ignorant of the differences between a private judge and a sitting judge.  In this case she includes the time-honored, and non-existent "reading of the will."  This allows her to have the wife and her intended successor in close contact in a meeting with attorneys present when, in fact, clients would never have been present at such a meeting.  Although attorneys for both parties are present, the heroine is allowed to do and say stupid things, all to her detriment.  In fact, throughout the book (I've only read a third of it and won't bother with the rest), she acts stupidly, all contrary to her best interests and to common sense.  I can't take any more.  I suggest that others not even read page one.
276085
Believe it- I bought the book and read it.  Author is desperate to try to lay blame for a non event at the Lacrosse player's feet because they are white and wealthy.  I read every page- it was kind of like watching GIRLS- a hate read.  The author also published  apiece opposing free speech.  This guy should not be supported.  AVOID this book
2060745
To sum up as succinctly as I can: not cute.

This was one of the most aggravating, childish books I have ever had to drag my eyes across. I really don't understand the high ratings -- the author is insufferable, lazy, self-aggrandizing, unapologetic, and above all tedious. The narration makes sense when she begins with her childhood, so the chronic self-centeredness feels like a justified match given her age at the time, but then suddenly she's married? With a child? And continually blaming others for her allegedly zany mishaps, making excuses, or else telling the world "you're welcome" simply because she has made others' lives more difficult? Please. Her desire to write this book comes from such an obviously selfish, self-satisfied place that you wonder how on earth she could have grown up to think her little stories are THIS important. If you claim to relate to her on any level, I have unfortunate news for you: you are deeply, deeply obnoxious.

I was genuinely annoyed while reading this book. In fact, I forced myself to finish it so as not to give the author the "pleasure" of driving me off "like all the others," as she would doubtless claim. Fake editors notes are not the mark of a quality read, and I should have acted on my revulsion from the get-go. Skip.
1793557
Sometimes you find yourself thinking about a book after finishing it - this is one of those books, not for a good reason, but because the author really cheats the reader.

She's a good writer - the opening chapter is superb; and even though it's obvious after the second chapter Who Did It and even though I didn't like most of the characters, I read on to the end to find out Why.

Well, you don't find out, and there are lots of unexplained or unlikely threads in this story.

Don't get this book unless you want to feel really cheated for having wasted the time you have invested in reading it.

The author should withdraw it and do some major revisions; even if it's intended as the first of a series (and I see nothing in the book to suggest it) it's not worth it.

Major spoiler alerts hereafter -------- Addressed to the author, so don't read on if you really want to read this book.

If Stella spends most of her time drinking, puking and passed out, I'm amazed that she's a fit, toned runner!
Patrick is one of the few likeable characters in the book; what's his motivation for such a monstrous and complete fraud that he maintains for 4 years? If he knows about Jamie and also about Stella's new job, why on earth doesn't he alert their employers so that they can be kept apart?
What is Jamie's motivation for so completely rejecting and destroying both his family and fiancee? If he spent 4 years undercover for the white hats, why does he suddenly turn black hat? Beyond that, why does he want to kill Stella?
George is written so as to come across as such a pale wally of a character that one wonders why the author bothered to even put him in the book.
And why would Jamie have to "die" in order to go undercover? He's just some anonymous student, apparently playing some anonymous baddie, and not even in his hometown or his student town. Nonsensical.
760426
I never hated a book so much that after reading the first 35 pages of it I wanted to physically burn it, and after 250 pages I wanted to speed read the last 50 pages so that I could write this review. I am glad to be done with this book, it is not going in my library bookcase, and it will not be shared, it will however reach the trash can.  Anyways I finished reading the entire novel to be greatly disappointed by the one-dimensionality of the plot itself. The character development was both steady and well put together. So I can't say he's a bad writer, per se but the author literally made me hate the book intentionally because of either the nature of the subject or the lack of passion for the characters themselves. Either way, I found the ending methodically stupid. I found the beginning to be somewhat enlightening if anything came from reading this book I picked up my phone and called my grandfather who served in Korea to tell him both how proud I was of his service and thanked him that his generation helped stop this madness, from spreading. That said, the book is totally unrealistic about both the politics of the world and of the time. Nothing was not predictable, even the page count... Please avoid reading this book maybe the author has other titles that are better but this will be my first and last Turtledove experience.
3294656
There are great ideas in the book, but the author spends a tragic amount of time being rude to the people who would benefit the most from this book.
2328926
Story had a great flow until the author started to inject his obvious hatred for police and anyone who disagrees with his beliefs.  Great drinking game would be to take a drink every time the word "bigot" is used.  Fair warning though, you will be dead of alcohol poisoning by the 2nd book.  This could have been an entertaining story and a great series if only the author has left out the politics.  You can feel the authors hatred for a certain type of people after awhile.  I hope that he gets over the anger and hatred and starts to just tell good stories.  I'm afraid I won't be reading anymore of them though.
629522
The entire story could have been effectively told in ten pages, yet this collection of authors prattles on at excruciating length about trivial information such as the bloodlines of even the most superfluous characters.

The story itself doesn't make any sense.  I mean, why would a being who is all-powerful, who could fix any problem by snapping his fingers, choose such a stupid solution as sending an innocent to die a slow, painful death?  I couldn't really associate with any of the characters, and the morals of the story were most wretched.  Goldilocks provides an infinitely more ethical lesson and uses about a thousand less trees for paper.

To say that the whole book is poorly written would be the greatest understatement in the history of understatement.  I mean, I couldn't even tell if the God character was the antagonist or the protagonist.  Avoid this book.  There's a reason they're trying to give it away.  Do yourself, and literature on the whole a favor, and throw it in the trash.
585380
Babywise offers some useful advice, but Ezzo shoots himself in the foot with his arrogant, negative, manipulative tone.

I had to force myself to finish reading this book so that I could write a complete review.  I lost patience within the first 50 pages; the author spends as much time and effort railing on attachment parenting as he does explaining and defending his own theory.  He blames attachment parenting for almost every problem in society: obesity, learning disabilities, even postpartum depression and child abuse.  His hatred of this parenting method seems totally irrational, and oftentimes he doesn't even have his facts straight.  He repeatedly asserts that attachment parenting is rooted in Freud's birth trauma theory, but I have read a great deal about it and have never come across anything mentioning to Freud or birth trauma.

Ezzo calls carrying one's child in a sling an "extreme" behavior.  He spends a paragraph arguing for circumcision with incorrect and unreferenced "research."  His comparisons between "Chelsea," a baby raised on the babywise method and "Marisa," a baby raised on attachment parenting's principles, are so exaggerated that I couldn't take them seriously.  Clearly not all attachment-based children turn out like the nightmare child Marisa- if they did, attachment parenting would have disappeared long ago.

The book is also poorly edited.  I found numerous spelling and punctuation errors, not to mention common typos.  Not only does Ezzo lack any real credentials, but he also didn't bother hiring even a freshman English major to check his writing for common errors.

If you choose to buy and read this book, keep in mind the fact that you will just be reading 211 pages of some guy's opinion.  Ezzo is not a doctor, nor a qualified childcare expert of any kind.  If he would have left out his ultraconservative, arrogant views and simply published the essence of the babywise method, this book would be 50 pages long and maybe a worthwhile read.
1852304
There's clearly personal stuff going on in some of the reviews of this book, which is too bad. I find negative reviews as helpful, if not more so, as positive ones. Obviously if someone is just out to trash a book or an author, that review is not going to be helpful.

Upon cracking the book and reading the author's foreword, I was immediately left with a bad taste. I found those three pages incredibly angry (not in a good way) and even pretentious. Was this book going to be like a morose and poorly written blog?

There are a couple reviewers who stated this book doesn't even have zombies in it. Clearly they did not finish the book, they did not get a third of the way into it. I understand that, because the first hundred pages reminded me of being at the world's most annoying house party and praying for zombies to crash it. And like a lot of other reviewers, I hated the protagonist. There are arguably no likeable characters at all.

But throw in some zombies and Ross becomes less unlikeable. More importantly, I went from truly disliking the book to being sucked into it.

Yet, there are problems with this book. I feel this story is quite personal to the author, a little too autobiographical, as in, if you remove the zombies and change a few names you could stick it in a different section of a book store. This passionate view hurts the story the way venom rots skin.

The word `End' is in boldface throughout the book. This is Hornsby channeling Mark Danielewski, and not very well. The only Bret Easton Ellis book I've read is `American Psycho,' and frequent references to and lists of products, movies, bands and buildings reminded me of the rampant consumerism that slaps you around in `American Psycho.' Are these homages (can I pluralize homage?) or pointless imitations? I say pointless imitation for the Danielewski bit and a C+ rated homage for the Ellis stuff.

The real annoying-to-the-point-of-being-cringe-worthy parts of this book are the frequent moments where our main character sighs. These signs are immediately followed by the phrase, `a terribly unoriginal gesture.' This got old, fast. I know it means something, but I just don't care. Early in the book it occurred so often that, after a few sighs, I'd stop reading, close the book on my left thumb and sit, frustration seething. My copy of the book was published by iUniverse and there is a picture of the author on the back cover. I'd stare at the picture of Jason Hornsby in his bright blue shirt and grey tie, head tiled with dark sunglasses, sad-looking goatee and an expression of staged, smug seriousness. That picture made me hate the author and it helped me hate the main character because I assume they're one in the same.

In the end these issues become minor, but memorable. The story goes from annoying post-teen nonsense to a government conspiracy involving spies and creating a reality show centered on zombie attacks - with some post-teen nonsense still hanging around. A difficult subplot of relationships with friends, family and lovers turns from sour to heartbreaking. There's plenty of descriptive gore. Also, his zombie hook is different from anything else that I've seen before. Hornsby understands that a book about zombies isn't actually about zombies. There are deep and personal thoughts, epiphanic moments, and maybe even a little cathartic growth. The most incredible and impressive thing about this book is how Hornsby never explains the origins of his zombies. That alone gets a star.

To Mr. Hornsby: If you had the opportunity to rewrite this book ten years on, it would be quite different. An angst-filled early-twenties fueled story featuring betrayals by and deaths of jerk off friends would be replaced by a more measured, better flowing early-thirties fueled story where I bet fewer friends would die. But leave that revisionist crap to George Lucas. Write another book, this one is what it is - more good than bad. Grow your talent. Someday I'll get around to reading your earlier book, `The Perfect Spiral,' which many of your acquaintances also dislike.