Books like this make me worry that it isn’t what you write but who you know that gets your material published. Joe McGinniss’ book, which he hoped would be “the last best chance to put the truth about Sarah [Palin] in front of the American people in a documented, verifiable way” is full of lies, rumors, and ill-wishes. For an overview of the book, read this.
“Ironically, while McGinniss tried to write the definitive Palin exposé, he inadvertently exposed how the left-wing gentry and the media think–not just about Palin, but about Americans in general. It is no accident that McGinniss’s impressions of Wasilla and Obama’s thoughts about rural Pennsylvania are virtually the same.” – from the Joel Pollack review
It’s is what you write. I’m pretty sure McGinniss couldn’t have gotten a positive portrayal of Palin published, even if he had evidence that would hold up in a court of law.
Well, she has her own books (and shows), and there are other books on her, though I doubt they are worth anything. Clearly, McGinniss wanted to prove the worst and couldn’t let the absence of evidence get the way.
I wonder what book could be written about secondary or widely panned political figures of the last few decades, people like Dan Quail, Alan Keyes, Geraldine Ferraro, and whatshisface.
There’s plenty of people in the USA who’d buy a hagiography of Palin. She’s a love-hate figure, unfortunately for those of us who’d like to actually know the plain truth…