The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

HuffPo’s Hateful Haitian Pascal Robert (@probert06) Grossly Insults Dana Loesch

Posted on | August 28, 2013 | 97 Comments

Earlier today I mentioned DHS employee/hatemonger Ayo Kimathi, who described himself as “Haitianist,” to which a few readers responded, “Huh?” A simple translation would be “Kill Whitey”:

We Haitianists invite all PanAfrikans, Black Nationalists, Black Progressives, and other anti-white, noble-minded Black people to join us in celebrating our Afrikan New Year in August of each year. From this day forward, August will officially be “Nat Turner Month” for WOH and it will mark our Afrikan New Year.

Have I got your attention now? Let us examine the rather more articulate racialism of Huffington Post contributor Pascal Robert:

As long as the oppressed group views its oppressor as the fountain from which all approval and validation comes, there can never be any true achievement of justice based on eliminating the authority of the oppressor in that power relationship. . . .
Status quo forces of oppression do not concede rights and political viability to those they oppress because token symbols of achievement and demonstrative humanity have been shown by those on the margins. The oppressor simply keeps dangling the carrot, moving it farther and farther down the road, as you continue to do every seemingly morally upright thing he demands to achieve that coveted “equality.” .  . .

You are “the oppressor,” whitey, and in case you haven’t figured it out yet, Pacal Robert is not a reform-oriented liberal Democrat. He is a radically anti-American black nationalist whose allegiance is to Haiti (from which his parents immigrated here) and who blames Haiti’s problems on “constant U.S. intervention and destabilization.”

Pascal Robert is not a “liberal.” He is not merely “prejudiced.” He has an elaborate anti-white ideology, which explains his absolutely shocking Twitter campaign against Dana Loesch:

Several of Dana’s friends on Twitter misunderstood this, calling Robert a “liberal” or “progressive,” but he is neither: He is a racialist who hates America because he hates white people.

Why do you think the background image on his Twitter page is a painting of the 1791 Haitian uprising, showing whites decapitated?

Honestly, it is way past time for Americans to acknowledge the extent to which what often passes for “liberalism” is nothing of the sort.

This is simply hate, and Huffington Post is publishing it.


Bookmark and Share

LOL: @LaurelRConrad Smacks Liberal HuffPo Commenters With the Truth

Posted on | August 28, 2013 | 20 Comments

You remember the Oberlin racism hoax (“Another God-Hating Anti-American Democrat Exposed as a Criminal Liar“) in which the perpetrator of that high-profile pseudo-hate-crime was revealed as an Obama supporter who hates God and hates America.

Of course, all Democrats do, but I digress . . .

Laurel Conrad reports the comic denouement:

After the hoax was exposed, the Huffington Post ran an article by the Associated Press, “Oberlin Racism Hoax.”
However, the AP article left out one critical piece of information, that the hoax was perpetrated by a liberal. We could not have set a better trap if we had tried. . . .

Read the whole thing at Legal Insurrection. She’s a senior at Cornell University and has fewer than 100 Twitter followers. Fix that, eh?


Bookmark and Share

Well, I Shouldn’t Disappoint Pete

Posted on | August 28, 2013 | 27 Comments

Da Tech Guy is disappointed that I didn’t take up his earlier challenge to address the fakeness of the 1973 Billy Jean King/Bobby Riggs “Battle of the Sexes” tennis match, but as I said, I recognized it as hype at the time. Although I didn’t know the fix was in — because Bobby Riggs owed $100,000 to the mob — I was 13 at the time and sophisticated enough to see it for the silly hype-fest it was. Even if King’s victory had been legitimate, what was proven by having a female athlete in her prime beat a 55-year-old man at a non-contact sport?

Pretty sure my remark at the time was, “Let her try football.”

Did I ever mention I was a small-town sports editor for years?

Covered some truly excellent female athletes, including state champion sprinter Shea Thurman and basketball standout Tammy Starr, but it would have been absurd to have expected either of them to compete against championship male athletes. Thurman could outrun all but the fastest boys in Gordon County, but her time in the 100-meter dash was still two seconds off the top boys’ times. Yet Sonny Bunch was shocked to realize he’d been bamboozled by the Riggs-King scam:

I hadn’t realized that Riggs trounced — just absolutely crushed, in straight sets, giving up only three games over two sets — Margaret Court, then the most dominant women’s player in the world, just a few months before playing King.

Ding. Ding. Ding.

It’s another example of The Story Too Good to Be True, a stock item in the dishonest repertoire of liberal journalism.

The Cult of Equality has always been a lie, a March to Nowhere, and my opposition to it is not an expression of “misogyny” or any of the other political pejoratives that radical egalitarians use to silence their critics. It is simply a common-sense recognition of reality.

“Believe me, Sir, those who attempt to level, never equalise. In all societies, consisting of various descriptions of citizens, some description must be uppermost. The levellers therefore only change and pervert the natural order of things; they load the edifice of society, by setting up in the air what the solidity of the structure requires to be on the ground.”
Edmund Burke, 1790

More than two centuries have passed since Burke described the falsehood inherent in the Cult of Equality, but radicals have never ceased to “pervert the natural order of things,” spreading misery and calling it Progress, and the madness continues to this very day.

So my apologies to Pete for neglecting his challenge, but the thing is, if these fools won’t heed the wisdom of Edmund Burke, why should I expect them to listen to me?

We should never accuse feminists of mere ignorance.

They know the truth. They just hate the truth.



Bookmark and Share

Haters Who Hate Hate: DHS Employs Deranged Race Warrior Ayo Kimathi

Posted on | August 28, 2013 | 48 Comments

Ayo Kimathi has been placed on paid leave from his job at the federal Department of Homeland Security, but John Sexton at points out that Kimathi now claims “his supervisors were aware of his outside activities since December 2010.”

John embeds the bizarre YouTube video and in checking it out — sample quote: “We, hate our enemies because we love ourselves” — I noticed this: “The spirit of Nat Turner has returned!

Yeah. And people call me an extremist . . .

UPDATE: When this story first made headlines last week, I shrugged, but check out his “War on the Horizon” rant:

War on the Horizon (WOH) is a Haitianist organization created for the purpose of preparing Black people worldwide for an unavoidable, inevitable clash with the white race. whites around the world are absolutely determined to exterminate Afrikan people in all corners of the Earth.
As a result of this reality, WOH has dedicated our time and expertise to properly educating Black people to prepare for Racial Warfare. This includes intellectual, spiritual, psychological, and physical preparation for a global clash that will mean the end of white rule on this planet or the end of the Black Race as we know it. . . .
Afrikan people are an international racial family who share a common: homeland (Afrika), Racial origin, culture, destiny, and a bitter enemy — the white race. We are challenged by our common destiny to eradicate the system of racism white supremacy and its benefactors in order to establish righteous Black Dominion over Planet Earth.
We are mandated by our Creator to return to our proper status as rulers of this world. It is within the full rights and responsibility of every member of the Black world family to see to it that this ultimate goal is achieved so that we may once again restore peace and prosperity to Planet Earth under the divine and just leadership of God’s first people — The Black man, woman, and child of Afrika.

“Haitianist”? This is an interesting adjective.

UPDATE II: Realizing that somebody like Ayo Kimathi could be employed at DHS for years gives you a new and different perspective on the negligence toward the Fort Hood shooter:

“A US Army major is writing to this imam and essentially asking for religious sanction to kill American soldiers,” said attorney Reed Rubinstein, who represents a group of victims who are suing the federal government. “And the FBI’s Washington field office doesn’t even interview the man or make a phone call to his superiors. It’s utterly incomprehensible.”

It’s only “incomprehensible” if you fail to realize how, in the regime of “multiculturalism” and “diversity,” all hate is not created equal.

Some people have a right to hate. Some hate actually calls itself “social justice” and “tolerance.” And also, “Hope and Change.”

They “savagely beat her while calling her racial slurs”? Maybe Ayo Kimathi is right about a race war. Maybe it has already begun.

UPDATE III: What I can’t understand is why black nationalist race warriors never hate the white people who deserve to be hated.


Bookmark and Share

Internet Douchebag Patrol: Commie Scum and Other Satanic Creatures From Hell

Posted on | August 28, 2013 | 60 Comments

“Especially important is the warning to avoid conversations with the demon. . . . He is a liar. The demon is a liar. He will lie to confuse us. But he will also mix lies with the truth to attack us. The attack is psychological, Damien, and powerful. So don’t listen to him. Remember that — do not listen.”
The Exorcist (1973)

“Facts and logic that contradict their arguments are dismissed as somehow tainted because they don’t come from reliable (i.e., leftist) sources, whereas any specimen of counter-factual lunacy is acceptable to them, so long as it supports their anti-social worldview. There is therefore no point in trying to reason with such fools.”
Robert Stacy McCain, May 4

How did I get into this gig? Keeping watch on the Internet for outbreaks of douchebaggery was not a career I ever deliberately chose, but it seems to have become a sort of calling — a ministry — and it has gotten so that nowadays the douchebags seek me out, evidently craving my denunciation as a rite of passage. OK, whatever.

Why did Burkely Hermann do that? I don’t know, but if he thought I’d just shrug it off, he thought wrong:

What Part of ‘Fuck You, Commie Scum’ Is
So Hard for @BurkelyH to Understand?

You can read the whole thing, but that was just another day at the office for me. You are never going to persuade these people that they are wrong. If they were interested in facts or amenable to reason, they wouldn’t be Commie scum, would they? So instead the points to be proven are (a) they don’t know what the hell they are talking about, and (b) anyone who shares their worldview is an idiot, too.

So today I was scrolling through my neglected e-mail:

From: Ross Pannebecker <>
To: Robert McCain <>
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 1:19 PM
Subject: What Part of ‘Fuck You, Commie Scum’ Is So Hard for @BurkelyH to Understand?
Dear Mr. McCain,
Why have you not responded to my previous email? Is it because you feel bad that you called a mentally disabled kid a “sociopathic cop-killer?” Is it because you feel some inkling of remorse deep down in your withered heart? I thought you conservatives were supposed to be the “party of morals;” pray tell, what is moral about making fun of autistic children?
How pathetic are you that, when someone you don’t know on the internet calls you out, you dedicate an entire article on your website to bashing them? This is not journalism. In the first part of your article, you write “Well, who is Berkley Hermann and why should anyone care?” My question to you, Mr. McCain, is “why do YOU care?”
I find it ironic that I, a person of the age of Mr. Hermann, can write something more civilized than you, someone who apparently graduated college in the mid-1990s, when Mr. Hermann and I were being born. You are a poor excuse for a journalist, and I hope you will have the decency and sense to write back, unless of course you are the coward you appear to be.
Have a nice day,
Ross Pannebecker

To that email I replied:

I miss a lot of e-mail, as my inbox overfloweth.
If you were a regular reader, you might understand my general habit: Some douchebag wanders into my field of online vision, and I pile onto the douchebag with all the rhetorical force I can muster. This is kind of a random process.
As to this specific instance, Howard Zinn was a Commie and Mumia is a cop-killer. These are just facts.
I called Hermann a cop-hater, not a cop-killer.
Is he indeed “mentally disabled” and afflicted with autism? Of this I was unaware. But if he wants to chastise me on Twitter and defend a Communist like Zinn, he can expect no favoritism, nor do you do him any favors by claiming victimhood on his behalf.
P.S.: I graduated from college in 1983. My oldest child is 24.

And to this, Ross replied:

So everyone who disagrees with you is a “douchebag?” Please inform me how that is condusive to level-headed political discussion. Please tell me how that does anybody any favors. You are a grown man and I would think that, in a professional setting such as your website, you would have the discretion to not throw around vulgar language willy-nilly. It makes you sound uneducated and immature, and hardly at all like a respectable journalist.
I am not claiming Mr. Hermann is a victim. He is fully aware of what he is doing. I am simply pointing out that it speaks volumes about your character that when confronted by a stranger on the internet, you think it is appropriate to spew obscenities at those you disagree with. People who do not share your views (such as myself) are not “trolls,” and to dismiss them as such cuts any chance of political discourse down to nil, thereby making you, Mr. McCain, part of the problem.
In short, try to respect your political opponents. Being a communist does not make you a bad person, any more than being a capitalist does. I would you think you would already know that, but, hey, the world is full of surprises.
Have a nice day,
Ross Pannebecker
P.S. the fact that you are ten years older than I thought you were only makes your actions more embarrassing and misguided.

Is this rich, or what? I must “respect . . . political opponents,” even young fools who jump into my Twitter feed to abuse me, even amoral monsters who admire Communists and cop-killers. “Being a communist does not make you a bad person,” says young Ross, evidently indifferent to the atrocities perpetrated by Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Pol Pot and their various comrades in the Marxist revolutionary cause.

A Communist is the enemy of all mankind, an idolator of evil, the acolyte of a mass-murder cult. Never condescend to “debate” such creatures. No wise man debates a rabid dog.

A civilized person has no obligation of “decency” to a disrespectful punk who insults him as a “coward.” I now lament having wasted time responding privately to Ross Pannebecker, who has identified himself clearly as an enthusiastic apologist for evil.

P.S.: You misspelled “conducive.”



Bookmark and Share

Your Semi-Official Obama vs. Syria Armageddon Predictions Thread

Posted on | August 28, 2013 | 104 Comments

“Obama: Anatomy of a World Leader,” by Alex Gray (detail)

We’re supposed to start bombing the crap out of Damascus sometime soon, because President Obama has managed to make this imperative to U.S. credibility, and you know Dear Leader has gotten himself into a bad spot when Alan Colmes goes on Fox News and denounces the president in such strong terms that if any Republican had said it, they’d be the subject of a special alert from Media Matters.


Does anybody remember “The War of Monica’s Thong“?

In 1999, a few weeks after the Senate voted to acquit President Clinton for “high crimes and misdemeanors” — of which he was clearly guilty — Clinton suddenly decided that he’d had it up to here with Slobodan Milosevich. So NATO started bombing the crap out of the Serbs.

This was arguably the worst use of U.S. military force since the Spanish-American War, with “genocide” replacing “Remember the Maine” as the battle cry. Of course, the civil war in the former Yugoslavia had been raging for years, Milosevich’s brutality wasn’t exactly a recent development and we were, objectively, fighting in defense of a Muslim insurgency, with the Kosovo Liberation Army as al-Qaeda’s Balkan front. Because the Serbs had traditionally been Russia’s allies, the bombing campaign against Belgrade also had the effect of alienating Russia, which had been a potential ally in the post-Soviet era.

Our involvement was directly contrary to our own national interest, but because Clinton was eager to regain the prestige he had lost in the year-long Lewinsky ordeal, this “humanitarian” intervention was suddenly deemed necessary by the Commander-in-Chief.

Bad wars fought by bad presidents for bad reasons are not exactly a novelty in American history, and the long-term consequences of these spasms of politically motivated militarism are never good. While Clinton was bombing Serbs on behalf of Kosovar Muslims, their terrorist allies were already planning what became 9/11, but good luck getting Alan Colmes to admit that Clinton’s “Wag the Dog” distractions and other errors made America vulnerable to al-Qaeda.

However, Alan Colmes has had the wisdom to condemn the upcoming Syrian intervention in advance, and we should be grateful for that, rather than complaining about past errors.

The Assad regime is a murderous totalitarian nightmare, supported openly by Iran and supported tacitly by Russia and China. However, the Assad regime’s insurgent enemies are Islamic extremists with connections to al-Qaeda, and if these Syrian insurgents aren’t committing genocide, it’s only because they’re too busy trying to overthrow the current genocidal regime. Does any honest person doubt that Assad’s enemies would be as bad as (or worse than) Assad if they were to succeed in overthrowing him? Which is not to say anything in favor of a dictator using nerve gas against civilians, but at least now we know what happened to Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, eh?

Still, enlisting the United States as al-Qaeda’s de facto air force is bad policy, and it will predictably have bad consequences.

The specific consequences may be impossible to predict, but we know for sure the consequences will be bad.

My hunch is that Iran will respond to U.S. attacks on Syria by launching its own attacks against Israel. Probably rocket attacks from Gaza, but maybe also a wave of suicide bombings. Israel will feel the need to retaliate, so I’ll go out on a limb here and bet that the IDF decides it’s finally time to destroy the Iranian nuclear threat.

Remember, our president is a Nobel Peace Prize winner, which means World War III is always a distinct possibility.

Place your bets, gentlemen. My money’s on “Biblical Apocalypse.”


Bookmark and Share

Tara Carreon Doesn’t Know Why People Hate Her Censorious Douchebag Husband

Posted on | August 28, 2013 | 57 Comments

Allegedly the wife of Charles Carreon

When last we left the ongoing saga of censorious douchebag Charles Carreon, the “Popehat Reign of Terror” led to Charles being challenged to debate Ken White over Charles’ proposition that “Distributed Internet Reputational Attack” be recognized as grounds for a lawsuit, which inspired me to remark:

Thin-skinned narcissists who cannot admit error — whose response to criticism is always to demonize their critics, and who therefore automatically externalize blame for their own mistakes — are always doing this sort of thing to themselves in the Internet age.
Look: If you are ever in a situation where your stupidity makes you a target, the correct thing to do is . . . nothing.
Don’t react. Don’t try to defend yourself. Don’t lash out at your tormenters. Just ignore it until it is over. Learn your lesson, avoid repetition of the error, and be glad it wasn’t worse.
People who merely describe your stupidity — however mocking and sarcastic their descriptions — have done you no wrong.

Attempting to scapegoat others for your embarrassment, imagining that you have done nothing to deserve mockery or criticism, is never going to repair the damage you have done to yourself. God gives us the enemies we deserve, and we can learn lessons from such experiences, if we are willing to humbly accept chastisement.

Alas, Charles Carreon is prone to spasms of “pearl-clutching horror” — brilliant phrase, Ken — and so the comedic show goes on.

Last year, when Charles was threatening to sue everyone on the Internet into poverty, his wife Tara Carreon added to the entertainment:

“This is one of the little lying bitches working for Matt Inman,” Tara wrote about an apparently female commenter. In an exchange with another online commenter, Tara “jokingly” (her words) threatened that Carreon might subpoena him and search his hard drive. The bewildered commenter asked why he might possibly be subpoenaed. Tara replied:

For all of that illegal content on your hard drive. You’ll have to seek a protective order to keep your porn stash private. What’s your preference—het, gay, bi, BDSM?

The commenter responded, “Wait. Did you just vaguely threaten to try and out me to the general public using a subpoena and use that as a tool to embarrass and humiliate me? WOW. You, darling, have sunk lower than your husband.”

Notice the conspiratorial motif: Anyone on the Internet saying bad things about Charles Carreon must be “working for Matt Inman,” because it is impossible that this is just some random person who noticed that Charles Carreon is a censorious douchebag.

Notice also the Leninist “Who, Whom?” ethos: Threats that Tara Carreon would consider criminal if made against her or her censorious douchebag husband are perfectly acceptable when made against someone who does not admire her censorious douchebag husband.

OK, so in service of her “Stand By Your Man” act, Tara Carreon has started amassing “research” on all these evil people who call her husband a censorious douchebag, including yours truly:

There’s something really ironic about a guy who was a member of a white supremacist hate group, identified as such by the Southern Poverty Law Center, self-righteously hating on convicted domestic terrorist Brett Kimberlin. It’s as if they were brothers! Except that Brett has gone on to do good, and Robert Stacy McCain has gone on to do bad. Looks to me like Brett Kimberlin should be self-righteously hating on Robert Stacy McCain.
Boy, these guys do talk tough. They want you to know that you picked the wrong guy when you picked them for a fight! They going to squash you!
Mr. McCain has no shame. He just talks dirty, dirty, dirty, just like the rest of the rapeutationists. Their mothers should wash their mouths out with soap! Never has the world seen such an abundance of nasty talk.
And what about his Rodney King doctrine, that anyone targeted by the rapeutationists, better just lie down and not move, as their tormenters continue to kick the shit out of them? What a fascist, anti-democratic attitude.
So, that’s his advice. Here’s mine. Flee from the Internet as if it was the Devil himself, or some day you and your loved ones will be laying in a heap of bodies a mile high, all of you killed by the Internet. The nicer you are, the more likely you will be a target of the rapeutationists. This is a game where the bad guys point the finger at the good guys, and win.

Notice that Tara Carreon just became the umpteenth gazillionth person to call me a “white supremacist,” because everybody can rely on the Southern Poverty Law Center to provide them with truth and, also, a “hate map” directing their spree of violent terrorism.

Notice that Tara Carreon praises convicted felon Brett Kimberlin having “gone on to do good,” depending on your definition of good.

Notice that, three weeks after I last mentioned Charles Carreon on this site, Tara Carreon decides that I need to be profiled among the “tormenters” who “continue to kick the shit out of” poor helpless victim Charles Carreon. And why? Because he bears no responsibility whatsoever for the consequences of his ill-advised decision to send a demand for $20,000 to Matt Inman of

Tara Carreon ignores entirely — because mentioning it would invalidate the Victim Card she wants to play — that the only reason I ever noticed censorious douchebag Charles Carreon is because my name turned up in his list of “rapers” in the “Popehat Reign of Terror”:

Brett Kimberlin — obtained peace order prohibiting blogger Aaron Walker (Worthing) from writing about him (convicted domestic terrorist, bomber, perjurer; wounded a man so badly he later took his own life; laughed off the judgment; made vague and undocumented claims that he suffered threats from unidentified people; astoundingly vile; terrifyingly sociopathic; leads a contemptible life; crazy; quite evil; victimizer; malevolent; outrageous; despicable; remorseless and amoral psycho; crazy stalker) (Rapers: Aaron Walker, Patterico’s Pontifications; Eugene Volokh; Ali A. Akbar of the National Bloggers Club; Elizabeth Kingsley of Harmon, Curran, Spielberg & Eisenberg, LLP; Robert Stacy McCain)

Homey says, ‘I don’t think so.’

Homey don’t play that, see? You want to throw down, we’ll throw down, but when the fight starts with you sucker-punching me, you’d better by God be ready to bring it, because if I didn’t start the fight, I might feel obliged to finish it. And when you then derogate me for daring to notice your insults — as though I have no honor to defend — don’t whine when you find yourself losing the fight you started.

How does Tara Carreon dare to say I have “a fascist, anti-democratic attitude,” when it was her censorious douchebag husband who imagined he could sue the entire Internet into trembling silence?

Oh, I guess only lawyers have a license to terrorize and intimidate people on the Internet, and if any blogger dares say “boo” in reply, then the blogger must be an anti-democratic fascist.

But you just keep digging that hole, darling. By the time you dig your way to the flaming pit of Hell, I suppose you’ll still be blaming me.


Bookmark and Share

FAQ You, Seriously

Posted on | August 28, 2013 | 39 Comments


1. Where did all these book posts start coming from?

We’ve had them here at The Other McCain for a while, as you can see by clicking on the “Books” tag at the bottom of this post. Stacy reads a lot, I read a lot, and Smitty likewise is a big fan of the printed word. Every so often we run across something we think you ought to read or might like to read, and a book post results.

2. How come you’re reviewing all this Buck Rogers stuff?

To paraphrase Gahan Wilson, I review what I read, and most of what I read these days is science fiction because to be honest, most mainstream fiction is depressing crap written to please the leftist mandarins of the New York publishing houses. Also, as a number of folks have pointed out, if you want to avoid socialist/multiculti/prognazi crap, your best option is to read science fiction, especially if it’s published by a certain publishing house. Also also, judging from all the comments, people seem to like it. Finally, in case you hadn’t noticed, science fiction, comic book and fantasy fans won the culture wars back in the 1980s. Suck it up, buttercup.

3. Why didn’t you include [insert book title and/or author here] in your post?

There may be a couple of reasons. I may not have read the book (or the author), and in that case I’m not going to write about it since I’d rather be silent than pop off with something that makes it obvious I have no idea what I’m talking about. I may not have included it because it’s not pertinent to the week’s topic. (All you people who complained that Starship Troopers wasn’t mentioned in “Space Opera”, I’m looking at you.) Finally, I may simply have forgotten, as was the case with A. Bertram Chandler’s most excellent John Grimes stories. Here, try To the Galactic Rim.

4. But you left out [award-winning book/author]!

Again, I may not have read it. It’s also possible that I read it and thought it was crap, and since I’m talking about books I liked that I think you might like, I’m going to leave it out. If you liked it, great. Blogs are free; go write your own book post on one.

5. Hi, I’m J. Random Scrivener, Esq., and I just wrote my first self-published SF novel. Would you review it?

Why not? Send me a copy and we’ll see if I like it. After reading these weekly book posts for the last month or so, you should have some idea of what my tastes run to, so if your debut novel is trying to do for Star Trek what Fifty Shades of Grey did for Twilight , then please spare both of us the embarrassment.

6. I can’t believe you included [book title] in that post. That book was awful!

Sorry you didn’t like it. Here, I have some more books you probably won’t like either.

7. I can’t believe you included [author] in that post. He’s an awful, chigger-hating, faggot-burning, gun-fondling, heterosexist Neanderthal!

Yes. That’s part of the reason I find him entertaining and follow him on Facebook. Are you sure you’re at the right blog?

8. I like what you’re doing with these book posts, and want to encourage you to continue your fine work.

Thank you, it’s good to hear that. You can provide encouragement (and help support my addictions to protein bars, SF novels and Chick-Fil-A) by buying stuff through the Amazon links scattered throughout these posts. You’re already going to buy the stuff, why not do it here and give me a taste in the process? I’d be much obliged.

And that’s about all the questions I thought needed answering. Now, we have some books that people mentioned in the comments to last week’s post. Mind you, I haven’t read these myself, but most of the readers here at The Other McCain are sensible folk with good taste, so the odds are good you’re not going to be stuck reading some horrendous piece of krep.

Lots of folks waxed enthusiastic about Peter F. Hamilton, especially his Night’s Dawn Trilogy and Confederation Saga. Here’s The Reality Dysfunction from the former and Pandora’s Star from the latter. Also mentioned in this connection was Alistair Reynolds’ Revelation Space.

Other series mentioned were David Feintuch’s Seafort Saga (starting with Midshipman’s Hope), David Drake’s RCN novels (With the Lightnings – free on the Kindle!), Timothy Zahn’s Thrawn Trilogy (Heir to the Empire). John Ringo’s Live Free or Die got a mention, and since who says A must say B, we also need to mention Schlock Mercenary: The Tub of Happiness. Also also, Star Trek: The Complete Original Series, Babylon 5: The Complete Seasons, and Star Trek: Deep Space Nine: The Complete Series

There’ll probably be another book post later in the week, when I figure out what I want to do it on.

Bookmark and Share
« go backkeep looking »