Blood Meridian by Cormac MacCarthy

Synopsis

Set in the 1850's amid the westward expansion, a gang of cowboys tear through the US-Mexico border in search of scalps, which can bring them fame and fortune. But thats just the surface. Its literary gymnastics (hard to read), taking you through the real grotesqueness (both physically and humanely) of what really happened as the white man pushed his way west and south across the American West.

The story follows 'the kid', who takes up with a gang led by a man named Glanton. They're hired by a provincial governor in Mexico to bring back as many Apache scalps as they can. This leads them all across Mexico, through deserts and over mountains, through feast and famine, at times both the hunter and the hunted. Along they way they lose men, both to death and desertion, and pick up replacements where they can. Its in this manner the gang comes to be deputized by 'the judge', whom they run across sitting on a rock in the middle of the desert.

Suffice it to say that the judge becomes the most dynamic character of the story. He's ever present for every plot, usually the most brutal and cunning of the bunch as well as the most educated and outspoken. Through his philosophical views it becomes apparent that he is almost pure evil, and comes to represent all that is bad in man.

The story peaks and valleys over a long trail of death and destruction. There is almost nothing redeeming that happens along the way. The story doesn't climax until the last dozen pages, where the true seedy underbelly of the entire tale is revealed.

Highlights

This book was a very hard read, both in its length and MacCarthy's writing style. And the subject matter becomes tired and old somewhere in the middle of the book. I know this is the highlights section, but i'm getting there: the climax of the book, nay the last few pages, really delivers a punch that drives home much of what the rest of the novel is about. The judge and the kid, in their final act, really give you something to think about as you put the book down.

Lowlights

As I've said before, this was a really hard book to read. Some praise MacCarthy for his literary pose in this novel but I found it to be quite hard to read. His vocabulary consists of words with rare historical definitions mixing with the far reaches of the dictionary, with a pinch of raw spanish dashed in. This is on top of his familiar lack of grammatical punctuation. And I swear at times he's just making words up.

Summary

A hard novel, both in its content and in its read. You get dangled for most of the book, but the payoff makes it well worth your time.

Common Sense by Glenn Beck

Synopsis

Glenn Beck's rantings inspired by Thomas Payne and his original 'Common Sense', which helped inspire the American Revolution. He attempts to tackle every hot button topic, from immigration to religion, partisan politics to term limits. Its all intended to unite a people and inspire them to rise up and take back their government and God given rights.

Highlights

He opened my eyes to certain government flaws and indiscretions, especially about Congress.

• How voting districts and carved out to maintain partisan seats.
• The double standard of rules that Congress does or doesn't have to follow compared to the general citizen.
• Lack of term limits.
• Congress determining their own pay scale.

He also made a decent attempt to come across as independent in his stances, identifying specific Democrat and Republican politicians responsible for current issues, and blaming partisan politics in general for many others.

I've always felt that Glenn Beck does a decent job of educating himself before speaking on a topic, and siting his sources as he expresses his opinions. It lends him a fair amount of credibility in my book.

Lowlights

While Beck had many enlightening things to say, he also couldn't restrain himself from twisting down the path of soapbox ranting. And for the most part, regardless of how he came to his conclusion he usually did not have any sort of solution (other than to Rise Up!) to the perceived problems. There is a word for that, and its called 'complaining'. That was the tone of the entire book, well thought out complaints about this or that, and there is only so long before it becomes tiring.

I also have to mention there was one dark alley he went down that really disturbed me. A few times in the book he basically asserts that if you engage in debate with someone and they refuse to engage back or don't ultimately share your point of view, that proves the validity of your argument.

An example: The position liberals take on global warming is one where they are so convinced that it's real, that they refuse to debate the possibility otherwise. This refusal should be an indicator that there is a major flaw in their thinking, and should strengthen your resolve in the idea that global warming is NOT real. This would be Glenn's perspective. As for my perspective, I think that all of the scientific indications alone are enough to call the debate closed. And siting scientific evidence should not be reason to question the validity of my opinion. Without hard truths (like scientific data), there will be no end to debate.

My fear is that Beck arms people with radical ideas (not a problem) backed up with educated sources (also not an issue, I try to do the same myself), but then combines that with the self-righteous notion that if anyone disagrees with these ideas then they're wrong (big problem). Furthermore, he then motivates to spread the word.

Conclusion

Glenn Beck basically arms people with toxic combination of radical ideas and self-righteousness, and then directs his army to seek and destroy. Reading this book and educating MYSELF as to how these people think is the only weapon that can be used against them, and is the only reason I read this book.