Andy Borowitz

A well researched, lucid account of the pathway from politicians who had some level of sense to the dumbest politicians on the block. This author won my heart immediately when he declared his hatred for the words 'normalcy' and 'impactful'. I had read his comedy columns for years, fake news satires of what was happening in the real world, but this was more serious. It was well written, by someone who knows how to write...and edit... It was good to read his discussion of Reagan, because there show more are times I get the feeling I am the only living human being who remembers things like the recession, the lay offs, the farm foreclosures, and all the other things that happened during the Reagan administration...not to mention the fumbling of AIDS. Now I have sources in his index that can assure me I am not wrong for not remembering the sunny, completely positive, homey love bombing everyone seems to remember from that dark, frightening time. I do have one quibble with his conclusion, and I think he spots it, as well. Saying the best way to connect with people is by stories...well, sure. The problem is, that's what got us Reagan...and Bush...and Bush...and Trump. Stories are an extremely flawed way to gain information, and will not get the country back on track, and the one example he cites as a positive is hardly that. It shows, in fact, the power of people telling personal stories without any evidentiary basis, using them to convince people to vote for some of the most unscientific pap out there, and feel great about it. At some level, he does recognize that while stories might get us an Abraham Lincoln or an FDR, they are at least as likely to get us a Reagan or a Trump. When most of the stories told are 180 degrees from the truth, the situation becomes absolutely dire. In spite of that, the book is highly recommended. show less

I'm not sure whether Profiles in Ignorance by Andy Borowitz is a funny or a horrifying read, though I guess they aren't mutually exclusive.

Perhaps what makes this scarier than his humor on the New Yorker is that, as he says, this is all factual. This isn't him taking something and running with it, these are actual events, comments, and just general stupidity (ignorance is too nice, as far as I'm concerned willful ignorance is stupidity).

While he acknowledges that what he is calling show more ignorance is not the exclusive domain of the right, at least in the past half century the difference is one of creepiness (what is sex?) versus one of attempting to undermine and then overthrow democracy and our government.

If one reads the entire book (c'mon, it isn't very long) one will see that it isn't just putting GOP ignorance front and center, it is a call for the rest of us to cut back on our time in our own echo chambers, don't be a political tourist, and get active locally. There is a prescriptive element to the book at the end. Is it a detailed plan? Of course not, the call is to start making change locally, and every locality is different. So whining because you either didn't actually read the book or because you're incapable of doing any of the hard work yourself makes no sense and is misleading for those who haven't yet read the book.

Certainly those who are primarily political fans will enjoy the book, but it really is effective for those who take the call to action seriously. Knowing what we're fighting against helps us to better prepare and avoid some of the same mistakes, such as refusing to engage our brains.

Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via NetGalley. show less

Borowitz is a comedian and political satirist, so many of the comments are funny, but all have the "I'm smarter than my targets and don't care if they are hurt" tone of a know-it-all. All of his targets are Republicans. He acknowledges his bias in the forward, citing a few Democrats with poor judgement, but that is a paragraph in 330 pages of the book. The people who dislike "elite liberals" will detest this book. Reagan, Bush sr. and jr., Dan Quayle, Sarah Palin and, of course, Donald show more Trump, are his targets. All of these politicians have very weak grasps of history, geography and science. The author catalogs these errors, and invariably delivers a sarcastic comment. The dictionary defines "snark" as "an attitude or expression of mocking irreverence and sarcasm". This book is an extended example, and comes across as a mean spirited and one sided attack on the Republicans. show less

Had more people read Andy Borowitz’s PROFILES IN IGNORANCE when it came out in 2022, our country would not be in the mess it is now.
The theme running through it is how the dumbing of down America began during the 18th century when fewer people stopped reading books. “Our emotional, not-very-rational engagement with politics renders even the best-educated among us capable of voting like dopes.”
The first stage, Ridicule, began 50 years ago. With the rise and election of Ronald Reagan. show more Reagan was not interested in reading learning about issues that affect affected the country of which he was President. He was very good at making up historical quotes without letting facts in his way.
His advisors, Roy Cohn, Roger Ailes, Roger Stone, and Paul Manafort, would show up again in the White House. Under Reagan the slogan “Let’s make America great again” became popular. It was to be partly repeated decades later with the first word omitted.
George H, W. Bush’s Vice President, Dan Quayle, made a lot of verbal errors and was also not interested reading or learning what the job required. He once corrected a child’s correct spelling of “potato” by putting an “E” at the end. He did redeem himself on January 6, 2021 with his advice to Vice President Mike Pence.
The media and the public were quick to point out their deficiencies but they were reelected anyhow because the voters rejected Adlai Stevenson since they couldn’t relate to his intelligence.
The second chapter is Acceptance. George W. Bush was elected in 2000. Like Reagan, reading and learning were not among his interests. Al Gore, his opponent, was quite educated and not afraid to use his knowledge. Unfortunately, political shenanigans in Florida enabled Bush to stop vote count in Florida and collect Florida’s electoral votes.
In 2008, Sarah Palin became John McCain’s running mate. She also never let the facts get in her way. She would answer questions with whatever she wanted to say whether it was on the topic or not. The public and the media, however, glossed over that. While she talked how much she liked guns, she didn’t know how to load or shoot one.
The third stage: Celebration. In 2016, there was no question that Hillary Clinton was much, more qualified to become President than Donald Trump was. The media, however, focused on rumors and distortions against Hillary and ignored reasons why Trump was not qualified, such as his business, financial, and education failures.
Not all his targets were Presidents. Ron DeSantis, a Yale graduate, was governor of Florida when Covid hit. His policies resulted 1/5 of Covid-19 cases being in Florida.
The final chapter is Conclusion, Democracy’s Braking System. He presents reasonable, doable ways to elect , competent people to office.
By elevating candidates who can entertain over those who can think, mass media have made the election of dunces more likely.
Borowitz does not believe that more education would bring about better results. “Our emotional, not-very-rational engagement with politics renders even the best-educated among us capable of voting like dopes.”
PROFILES IN IGNORANCE brings back a lot of memories to those of us who were living then in a readable, often witty fashion.
If you haven’t read this book before, do it now. If you have, do it again. show less