Dick Cheney's Memoir

Here's a surprise. A retired politician writes a self-serving memoir in which he gives his version of events, while criticizing others. I know, that's just so unusual. But in this case it's Dick Cheney, so the sputtering outrage has already started.

It's pretty funny to read all of the whining, the sniveling about so-called "war crimes," Halliburton, and all the other hatred directed at Cheney. As a general rule I tend to avoid political memoirs, because there are more interesting things to read than packs of lies. But all the attacks on Cheney are almost making me want to read his book. I suspect it will have that effect on a large number of people. Cheney will probably be laughing all the way to the bank as his critics help boost sales.

Speculation About Cheney's Memoirs

The Washington Post has a report with the highly misleading title of "Cheney Uncloaks His Frustration With Bush." When I saw the title I read it to see what the ex-vp had to say about the former president, only to find something missing -- actual statements about Bush by Dick Cheney. Instead I found hearsay about things Cheney supposedly said in private conversations, and speculation disguised as reporting. The entire article is much ado about nothing.

Most political memoirs can be loosely described as self-serving packs of lies, and I expect nothing different from Dick Cheney. I won't be surprised if he has some criticism of Bush, although I don't expect it to be all that harsh. But if he follows the standard memoir format, it will be necessary to point out how things would have gone much better if only his ideas and advice had been followed more closely. Making that case naturally requires criticizing others.

Objecting to Books

The American Library Association has released its annual list of "most frequently challenged books," the works that received the most formal written complaints filed with a library or school in an attempt to have an offending tome removed. Here's the top ten for 2008, along with the reasons given for the complaints:

1. And Tango Makes Three, by Justin Richardson and Peter Parnell
   Reasons: anti-ethnic, anti-family, homosexuality, religious viewpoint, unsuited to age group
2. His Dark Materials trilogy, by Philip Pullman
   Reasons: political viewpoint, religious viewpoint, violence
3. TTYL; TTFN; L8R, G8R (series), by Lauren Myracle
   Reasons: offensive language, sexually explicit, unsuited to age group
4. Scary Stories (series), by Alvin Schwartz
   Reasons: occult/satanism, religious viewpoint, violence
5. Bless Me, Ultima, by Rudolfo Anaya
   Reasons: occult/satanism, offensive language, religious viewpoint, sexually explicit, violence
6. The Perks of Being a Wallflower, by Stephen Chbosky
   Reasons: drugs, homosexuality, nudity, offensive language, sexually explicit, suicide, unsuited to age group
7. Gossip Girl (series), by Cecily von Ziegesar
   Reasons: offensive language, sexually explicit, unsuited to age group
8. Uncle Bobby's Wedding, by Sarah S. Brannen
   Reasons: homosexuality, unsuited to age group
9. The Kite Runner, by Khaled Hosseini
   Reasons: offensive language, sexually explicit, unsuited to age group
10. Flashcards of My Life, by Charise Mericle Harper
    Reasons: sexually explicit, unsuited to age group

Whenever I see such a list I always wonder what is wrong with the people filing the complaints. Do they simply have nothing better to do? Are they really worried that some book in a library is going to corrupt their child? They must not have much faith in their own teachings. As parents, don't they monitor what their children read? People differ greatly on what constitutes age-appropriate reading, and about the topics they think are suitable material for children. But some people think they should get to decide for everyone else.

I grew up in a conservative Christian family. My parents would probably have objected to most of the books on this list. If I came home with a book that they didn't like (and I did occasionally), they'd take it up with me. But they weren't arrogant enough to presume that they should decide what books other people's children should be allowed to read.