Form-T Books

If you slept with him on the first date, the reason he didn't call you back is because you were bad in bed, not because he was only looking to 'get some.' If you didn't sleep with him on the first date, it may have been the perfect date for you, but it wasn't the perfect date for him. But chances are the real reason he didn't call you back is because he doesn't like you. Get over it.

This book is a must-read for any single woman frustrated with dating. We may not be able to change men, but at least we can laugh at them.

This is the kind of book that conservatives are going to hate and liberals are going to like (just as liberals would hate a book that poked fun at Obama, while conservatives would love it). So I recommend taking the wildly "offended" or wildly "ecstatic" reviews with a grain of salt.

I'm pretty middle of the road myself and though I'm registered Republican, I tend to vote by quality of the candidates rather than straight down the party line. So with that in mind, I have to say, I thought the book was pretty funny. There are a number of entries that are kind of irrelevant and focus on silly stuff, but a bunch of it does bring up some odd, curious and strange behavior from Palin's past in public office. The tone is very much in line with what you'd get from The Daily Show, which I think is pretty funny.

So, if you're not easily offended, looking to laugh, have an open mind, and think Palin is a questionable choice of VP (I do), I think you'll like this book.

This is a worthless, offensive, juvenile book. The author thinks he's funny. He isn't. There's nothing in this book to justify spending anything, let alone the full price.

This is just a hate book even if some think it's funny. America is being torn in two and this last, corrupt, sometimes illegal election on the part of Obama's campaign, is doing exactly the opposite of what Obama said about uniting the country. As this book illustrates, his campaign continues, even after the election, and I'm quite sure the campaign to trash, destroy, and mock all that is good, spiritual, and desirable for good living in America, is rapidly being persecuted into oblivion.

If you like the atheists trashing everything they don't agree with, liberal fascists not being liberal, radical women libbers trashing real women, the ACLU chipping away at citizen's rights and protecting illegal immigrants, then books like this, authors like this, and a sick mentality like this is sure to please you.

Just by looking at the short sample of various "Things You Didn't Know About Sarah Palin", I can tell that this book is a waste of money.

Palin does support funding abstinence education - along with encouraging contraceptive use. In other words, what the average American believes.

The f**king redneck quote that is attributed to Levi Johnston is a hoax. A friend of Johnston's who had access to the new father's myspace account posted it as a practical joke.

Todd Palin does work for BP - so isn't it even more strange that Palin refused to give BP a gasline deal, and went to TransCanada? Maybe nepotism just didn't matter to her after all!

Palin did offer bounties for wolf kills - the wolves were decimating Alaska's caribou herds, which many rural Alaskans rely on as a source of meat. Since Palin enacted the wolf-culling policy, caribou have staged a big comeback.

Apparently, this author has nothing better to do with his time than repeat discredited leftist talking points. PDS alert!

Interesting how absolutely EVERYONE is looking to make a buck off of Gov. Sarah Palin. More mindless drivel from main stream media. Don't waste your money.

Beautifully funny and hilarious tricks. In my mind I could just imagine how these tricks could be applied to friends family or people you don't like. Great entertainment.

Quick, think of a man who wants to get even with a woman that he feels has wronged him. What are the images that come to mind?

Obsessed crazed nut, stalker, psychopath, potential terrorist, murderer, rapist. Get a gun and shoot him in self-defense. Or, at the very least, his desire for revenge is seen as just another example of the boorish childishness of men.

Quick, think of a woman who wants to get even with a man that she feels has wronged her. What are the images that come to your mind?

Wronged woman getting even with a "jerk". Blackmail him. Expose the skeletons in his closet. Kick him.... Female-on-male revenge is always righteous and it sure is "fun". It's the staple of many works of entertainment; just look at all the members of the gentler sex in the theater cheering on Jennifer Lopez as she throttles a man to death. A generation ago, their mothers cheered on Ali McGraw for much the same thing.

A woman's desire to get even with a man isn't dangerous or childish, of course; it's just proof that you can't keep a good woman down.

Yes, a little study of the revenge industry shows it heavily steeped in femi-sexism, and this book, written by two Englishwomen, Jane Inder and Hilary Eyre, is no different.

"Hilary" is certainly an appropriate first name for an author of a revenge book, and to the extent that the male/female dichotomy is discussed, Jane and Hilary seem to design their commentary with the assumption that they are addressing a wronged woman justifiably desiring revenge against a male jerk.

For that matter, the discussion doesn't center exclusively on relationships. The authoresses gleefully repeat the Greek myth of how Artemis, the goddess of hunting and chastity, turns the hunter Actaeon into a stag and sics his own dogs on him to eat him alive. Actaeon's capital crime was that of having ogled Artemis while she was bathing naked. Punishable by mutilation and death, of course.

Obviously, life hasn't changed much since the days of ancient Greese. Women still regard themselves as goddesses, and they still regard male sexuality as a capital offense.

Still, the authors don't recommend this or any other violent method as a means of getting even; for that matter, they don't recommend that any of the "revenge" schemes that they discuss ever actually be used. The book has the expected disclaimer that these schemes are all being suggested "for entertainment purposes only". Of course.

To be honest, these authors seem a little more self-conscious of their femi-sexism than are others of their ilk. Once in a while, they allow for the concept of a wronged man. Or the bitchy co-worker. And not all revenge schemes stem from the male/female dichotomy anyway. The stuffy bureaucrat, the neighbor who lets his dogs and cats poop over your lawn, and the troublesome supervisor, could be of any gender and so could the one wanting revenge against them.

But the book also suffers from Anglocentrism. Apparently Londoners themselves, Jane & Hillary assume that all of their readers are English, a naïve assumption in the global electronic village that we now live in. Admittedly, this was less true in 1994 when this book was published. Still, if you are going to run a newspaper ad for a lost dog in the name of your target, it's useful to know that the most common dog breeds in the UK are German Shepards, Labradors, and Jack Russells, but only if you live in the UK. What about the revenge-fantasy-minded American, Canadian, or Australian?

I can't help but admire the twist on the old pizza trick though. Ordering a pizza to be delivered to a total stranger, just to play a prank on the pizza parlor, is ancient and pointless, and the pizza parlor these days insists on a call-back phone number to double-check. On the other hand, posting leaflets all over town giving your target's telephone number and advertising 24-hour delivery of discount pizzas is a stroke of brilliance.

But in large part, the schemes in this book smack of a great deal of naivete. They assume that you have access to your target's home or office or telephone or automobile. , what if your target lives out of town?

And they assume that you ALREADY know of your target's most embarrassing secrets. One who already has such access or such knowledge can probably come up with his own imaginative revenge schemes and doesn't need a book such as this to suggest them. And after the damage is done, how could one with such access or knowledge maintain a pretense of innocence anyway?

Besides, I think that the Internet effectively does away with personally-crafted revenge schemes. Why should anyone go to a great deal of time, effort, and expense to develop such schemes now? The cyber-head has enough knowledge at his disposal to make miserable the lives of others from his terminal.

And for about 20 bucks, the rest of us can visit any number of revenge-theme web pages, punch in our credit card numbers, and from the safety and comfort of our living rooms, order a melted box of candy or a dead fish to be anonymously delivered to our target. No fuss, no muss (not on our end) and quite possibly, not even illegal.

Your target might know or suspect that it was you, but she (heh-heh; assuming a female target) can't prove it.

Or if we just want to fantasize about doing that sort of thing, that certainly isn't illegal or costly.

Horns may protrude from my head and bloodthirsty hunting dogs may bay at my door. But secure in my anonymity, I give the Witches of London three stars for effort and deduct one star for femi-sexism.

This is the worst book I have ever read in my life. No matter how much they emphasize it is "for entertainment purpose only", they still should not get away with the tactless, thoughtless, and superficial revenge ideas. this is a book that I would definitely return -- it does not earn itself a place on my shelf. I wonder why it could be published in the first place. They did not even do a good job in their writings ---grammatical mistakes pop up from place to place. Not that I am terribly concern with grammar, but at least, writers are expected to write proper English.

The authors of this book are obviously from England. Some of the pranks they recommend might be fine there, but here they will land you in jail. Revenge carried out throught the U. S. Mail carries federal penalties and are not a good idea.

I believe Amazon should discontinue this book.

As far as gardening books go--this one is dirt cheap. If I had seen it in a book store I could have read it in ten minutes or so and saved myself the money. This slim book is a little bit of this (tips) and a little bit of that (quips) and not much really of anything. It's cute though--might make a nice stocking stuffer along with some packets of seeds, and there is a good tip in the book about the kind of flowers to plant with tomato plants to keep the insects away that just might be worth the price of the book if it really works. Overall, I have to say that for the price, it's not a bad book if you want to be mildly entertained with gardening quips and wish to pick up a tip or two. You won't become an expert gardener by reading this book, but I doubt if you would be ordering it if that was your goal.

Sure it's funny - but I've seen these all before. A TINY book but a BIG waste of time and money. It cost more to ship these things than the books cost!!

This book is less than four inches tall and has comics that are in other books.

I buy all Dilbert books. This one has the equivalent of 2 sunday comics in it.

Buy it if you a fanatical collector, otherwise give it a wide birth.

So, why three stars? I always start Scott Adams' work at three stars. This time, he didn't earn any more.

I saw this book in the store and read about four pages of it before realizing that if I was going to make fun of the "dont sweat the small stuff" books I could probably write something funnier without even trying. So I bought Don't Sorry, Eat Monkeys

Don't be fooled by its catchy title. It's nothing close to that. The 50 chapters are basically 50 stupid poems/sonnets/articles which are neither humorous or funny. Lets look at part of the proem:

"50 Days To A Better Sense of Humor is not a how-to guide." Huh? If I knew that I wouldn't buy!
"Let's face it. Either you have a sense of humor or you don't." [Wrong]! Humor is a skill that can be learned, like almost everything else.
"I find it hard to sleep at night knowing that some people find this book less funny than a phone book." I really think it is!

Lets look at some parody "poems", if you would call it that:

Day 31:
Tell Me More

Tell me more
I want to know,
I see, I see
Is that so,
Yes, yes
That could be
Of course, of course
You deserve to be free,
But don't rush out
Think about it logically,
Consider all options
That's the key,
You could do worse
I agree,
But what you want
Is a fantasy,
If I were you
I would flee,
I know, I know

There is no guarantee,
I wish there was easy solution
On which we could agree.

I know you've suffered
I know you're hurt
I know you're confused
And feel like dirt

Yes, it could be the end---
But no matter what
I'll always be your friend.

Sure, any time you're
Dragging on the floor,
Or pulled apart
By a tug of war,
Feeling like you've been hit
By a two-by-four,
Or crushed by a giant meteor---
Well, just call me up
And tell me more.

Can anyone laugh at that? I can't. Maybe I'm less literate, but I don't think one has to be highly educated in English Literature to be humorous!

Very dissappointed with this book or maybe it was my expectations.
Very basic but would be ideal for the teenager wanting to change the look of a purse.

When reading this book, you'll find yourself having to reread portions again just to know what you read. As for myself, I read the first chapter (30 pages) and had to go back the next day and read again because I had no idea what I had just read, only that it was something about landscape. The language does not flow, and too many quotations from sources within the essays interrupt the flow of the author's own ideas. It may be groundbreaking in the study of landscape, but the difficulty of writing style gives it a definite drawback.

This book is like the annoying know-it-all schoolmate or co-worker who insists he's right about everything and "proves" it by prefacing his every pronouncement with the phrase "Studies have shown ..." The answers provided in 'Lemmings Don't Leap' are woefully brief and superficial (how nice that the author can dismiss complex subjects that scholars have been debating for years, such as the "Who wrote Shakespeare?" controversy, in under two pages), completely unsourced, often wander far off-topic, and all too frequently WRONG! (If the author had actually done his own research rather than simply regurgitating the works of others, he wouldn't have made the ridiculous claim that no Vietnam soldier was ever spat upon by an anti-war opponent.)

There are plenty of web sites that cover this sort of material far better than 'Lemmings Don't Leap,' and they won't cost you $15 to read.