Blogs

Okay, there's a saboteur in the house. He or she or they posted a bunch of "reviews" of my little book, Florida Pulp Nonfiction, on Amazon.com. Check it out here. It's clearly a slime job -- and what really hurts is that it's obvious they didn't even bother to read the book before the assault.

Each review was posted on July 27 and they each follow pretty much the same formula -- insult whatever they thought might be insultable in the book (with no supporting details) and then advocate other books. Yeah, they tout Ann Rule, James Patterson, Naked Came the Manatee, a children's book, and even Mind of Mencia. Oh and they also give a shout out to Miami Psychic, a book by a fake clairvoyant and Sun-Sentinel writer that I've recently debunked. (I think that's the best clue of all as to who is behind it).

But hey, who's pointing fingers? They also mistakenly refer to it as a novel, which it is not at all, take a weird shot at Jim DeFede, deride the fact that it's published by a self-publishing house, and label it a get-rich-quick scheme. While that is all laughable, I want to say the book was a gift to me from the National Society of Newspaper Columnists.

I haven't even put the book in stores yet. I just don't have the time (anybody know a decent book publicist, by the way?). In fact, I haven't marketed it at all other than a mention on this here blog. There are two reviews on the Amazon page that are from people who used their actual names. Read those to get an idea of what this book is really like. Or check out this site.

The slimer(s) had some passion, I'll give them that. Check out this line: "As I read each story and realized how much Bob Norman "contributes to the abuse of power and illegal/unethical behavior" by so-called "investigative" reporters from two-bit tabloids riddled with porn ads, hiding behind the FIRST AMENDMENT, I laugh."

Or: "Exploiting to line his own pockets in my opinion! It seems it is nothing more than cheap paparazzi transformed into want-a-be novelist. Shame on this guy. I bought the book thinking it was going to be interesting, it is nothing more than a bore and a get rich quick plan for the author at the expense of others is what I believe."

And my favorite: "Better luck re-writing a recipe from your Mimaw's Derby Pie, Kentucky Bob, than piecing some semblance of a novel together from archives, it seems. At least Mimaw added some Bourbon-y kick to spice it up. I'd have to drink an entire bottle of Mimaw's nerve tonic to get through the slow-as-molasses I dun-dunnit."

Good show. Work it out. More power.

But one thing really does piss me off: The scalawags clearly lied about the part where they said they bought the book.

Not much time this morning, so just a few South Florida media news gems to pass along:

-- Scott Hiaasen's report on the continuing fallout of Arthur Teele Jr. A co-defendant in a criminal case is expected to go on trial soon and his lawyer, Richard Sharpstein, promises: "Even in death, we will vindicate Art Teele's name.'' Spare us the melodrama, Dick.

-- The Herald's Jennifer Lebovich tells us about the auditor of Southwest Ranches quitting because the town's records are in such disarray. This is the same town that contracts out the government to former Broward County finance director John Canada, a man who has turned the town into an incestuous pit of insider land deals involving insiders like Richard Rubin (husband of county commissioner Diana Wasserman-Rubin) and wheeler-dealer/ex-con Ira Cor. I wrote about this place last year and had some impact, but thanks to our incredibly lame state attorney, Michael Satz, the town's government is still a festering sore of corruption. On the plus side, there's real pretty horses out there.

-- The Sun-Sentinel's new Palm Beach County political writer, Josh Hafenbrack, illustrates why it's imperative that the Democratic Party get Howard Dean back on his Ritalin. Katherine Harris as Stalin? Well, her role in electing George W. Bush in 2000 certainly puts her in the pantheon of historic wrongdoers (considering the result), but seriously, I doubt she's killed half as many people as the Russian dictator. Dean is a jackass, if for no other reason than the fact he's giving people a reason to actually feel sympathy for Kruella Harris.

-- News 6, via the Sun-Sentinel, tells us about one Hollywood cop's very bad day at the office.

-- There's a fourth human casualty of lobster season and a fifth person missing, the Palm Beach Post's Kevin Deutsch informs us. Wake up, people. This senseless slaughter is only blowing up in our faces. Lobster-killing, what is it good for? Absolutely nothing. (Except the unmatched taste of succulent white claw meat dipped in hot butter).

-- And the Sentinel's Scott Travis does a good job of bringing us up to speed on FAU's clusterfuck of an election.

(Gonna be on Barry Epstein's radio show (1470-AM or on the Internet here) at 10:20 a.m. Barry's talking to Democratic gubernatorial candidate Jim Davis right now).

Here's El Nuevo Herald's response to the Miami New Times piece about its manipulation of photographs. Once again, I find wishing I really knew Spanish. I think it says, basically, that the newspaper did a no-no but that somehow it wasn't intended and it had nothing to do with "una agenda anticastrista," as alleged by Chuck Strouse, el autor del art�culo.

And then it says something like it's going to continue to investigate the matter so that it never happens again. Good enough, I suppose.

I got this in my NT e-mail box today:

Dear Editor:

Should publishers treat authors according to their race? Or according to the content of their work?

Floridian writer Millenia Black, a debut author with New York publisher Penguin Putnam, is currently experiencing one of the most horrendous depravities of racial liberty you could ever think of in the 2006 epoch: Because she is a person of color, her publisher has decided that, despite having written commercial work, she is not entitled to the same opportunities as their white authors!

Specifically, this publisher has unduly restricted the author's first novel, THE GREAT PRETENDER, by classifying it as "African-American Fiction" even though the book was, in total, free of any such ethnic content. Black successfully self-published the book without any such racial designation, which led to the contract with Penguin. Secondly, in another attempt to reach the mainstream marketplace, Black wrote her second novel, THE GREAT BETRAYAL, with all white characters, and this time the publisher told her the book would not be published if she did not change the race of characters!

Black was forced to retain a lawyer and serve Penguin a demand letter to correct the disparate treatment of both books. In response, they immediately agreed to accept and publish the second book with white characters as Black wrote it. A decision has yet to be reached on THE GREAT PRETENDER, which was published in September of 2005.

This treatment is absurd and grossly ridiculous, don't you think? Are books to be treated according to the race of the author and not the content of the book itself? Shall everyone just stand by and watch such insidious conduct by such an affluent and respected publisher, without saying a word? I think not. This is the very reason I am sending this letter, to let you know that this is happening and to ask for your help to bring this issue out into the open. I know that people with effective voices and platforms have always made a big difference.

For the author's own account of the issue, you can visit her blog:
http://www.milleniablack.blogspot.com -- See the post entitled "The Great Betrayal - Jim Crow Publishing" and also "Back, With a Beacon of Hope."

Yours truly,

Timothy Aldred

My take: It may be absurd, but it's all business. Penguin obviously signed Black, who lives in Fort Lauderdale, with the idea she was a niche writer aimed at black readers. And they obviously don't believe she's greatly marketable outside that niche. In other words, it's more about green that it is about black or white.

But that doesn't mean it's right. I certainly sympathize with Black and I think she has a legitimate complaint. It seems that, at the very least, Penguin has been duplicitious in the way it's dealt with her. Who wants to write a book -- a romance novel, in Black's case -- and have it marketed only at one demographic group? And the entire thing about changing the race of all the characters in the book is, indeed, ridiculous. I'm with you, Millenia.

The carnage of Mideast crisis gave way on the front page of the Sun-Sentinel to the killing caused by lobster season. Three people did die in the rush to eat the succulent flesh of crustaceans roaming the ocean floor, but I'm not sure it's quite time to relegate the new Lebanon War to the back pages.

The newspaper, to be fair, did have a little nugget about the war on the front page's bottom drawer, or Daily Digest, as it's called. Am I the only one who's noticed that thing is growing at about the same rate as the national debt? It's damn near reached the fold.

The highlight of the newspaper today was Chan Lowe's cartoon, "Uppity Puppet." I'll post it as soon as I can figure out how. I couldn't even find it on the web site.

-- I guess Dan Marino didn't get the memo about the buyer's market in real estate these days. Almost $16 million for a jock's gaudy palace in Weston? Nuh-uh.

-- In the Palm Beach Post, we have Daphne Duret's touching story about two lovers denied the chance to marry. Convicted murderer Tyrone Coates fell in love with his prison guard, Melinda Hall. Now the prison won't let Hall, who resigned her prison post, visit Coates or the couple to wed. It's not the first time Coates has had a conflict with the people housing him. He's in prison for beating and strangling his landlord to death.

-- In case you missed it, Miami New Times editor Chuck Strouse totally busted El Nuevo Herald for using one of the oldest propaganda tools in the book.

-- Yahoo's Kevin Sites has one of the best and most immediate reports from the Lebanon war zone you'll find.

-- And lastly, off-point, I've always felt like Howard Dean was a giant idiot. Now I'm sure of it.

The Miami Herald's Gary Fineout reports that Sergio Pino, a fundraiser for Charlie Crist's gubernatorial campaign, has stepped down from his post. It's another example of a strong, expansive press in South Florida getting rid of a bad clam in public life.

The trophy belongs on the wall of the Daily Business Review, one of those small publications that's worth its weight in journalistic gold. DBR's Oscar Pedro Musibay broke the story about Pino last week (I was out of town and so wasn't here to post it). Musibay reported that Pino reimbursed nearly $30,000 to Jeb Bush contributors in 2002. It's illegal, it's unseemly, and it's anti-democratic.

Now Pino is gone. And that wouldn't have happened were it not for the Daily Business Review's reporting. But you also have to give credit to the Miami Herald, which aggressively followed the story. The newspaper -- anchored by reporters Mark Caputo, Tere Figueras Negrete and Fineout -- even interviewed DBR editor David Lyons about the story after Pino claimed it was "way off." Without the Herald's weight, Crist and Co. might have been able to ignore the DBR story.

It's eerily similar to the O'Neal Dozier affair. Again it was the Herald that jumped on that story, put its own stamp on it, advanced it, and led to the impact. If the Herald keeps this kind of thing up, if it starts using its powers for good, why, it could become a great newspaper again.

In the end, we're all part of the Fourth Estate, no matter what cold, heartless corporation happens to pay our bills. If we're not trying to make things better, we shouldn't be in this damn business. And lately things have gotten just a little better.

Rep. Robert Wexler's fake admission on the Colbert Report that he loves cocaine and hookers has apparently gotten a lot of attention on both Good Morning America and Today. On those shows, former journalist Jake Tapper and other light and chirpy TV personalities basically warned politicians not to appear on his show in the first place, since Colbert makes them look so foolish.

Colbert responded by showing embarrassing footage from both shows and urging his viewers to vote for Wexler because he has a sense of humor and "journalists," well, they don't.

It was essentially the same point made in this week's Tailpipe, which hit the streets yesterday. While Tailpipe is generally infallible, I'm taking another tack on this crucial issue: I think it really proved that Wexler is more of a media whore than any of us ever imagined.

First off, if you've seen Wexler's over-earnest, McEnroe-esque appearances on CNN, you already know he's singularly unfunny during most TV appearances (which are many, too many). And think about it. What Wexler said was funny only because he looked like an idiot saying it. It was like, "Oh my God, Colbert actually got a congressman to say he loved cocaine and hookers because it's 'a fun thing to do.' Brilliant!"

Let's face it, Wexler isn't a bright man. He voted for the Iraq War and promised the world that Turkey would join in the fight. (I could really go on here for pages, but I'm going to spare you). When cameras are running, he's a damn good trained seal and will do whatever the man with the fish tells him. He's there to please. It's deeply ingrained in his very being by now, in a profoundly Pavlovian sense, that if he makes the TV guy happy, he'll get air time. And boy oh boy has he gotten air time, only it's the kind even a media hound like Wexler must regret.

But now the congressman is re-inventing himself. His staff is saying, oh, Wexler was having a good time, he's a good sport, he knew full well what he was doing. Wexler himself told the Associated Press, "I thought it was funny."

Unfortunately, he was already on record telling the unfortunate truth. The first reporter to get to him, the Palm Beach Post's Brian E. Crowley, got another take. First, Wexler told Crowley that he'd never watched the Colbert Report before. Ever. Now, only a person with no detectable funny bone -- or television, one -- could possibly have never watched that show. And then the Boca representative told Crowley that he didn't find humor in the show wherein he pledged his allegiance to ho's and the white pony. "Not my cup of tea," he told the Post of his "verdict" on the Colbert Report, adding that his children thought he looked flat-out foolish.

Still, it was still good for a laugh for those that got it the first time around.

Don't have much time this morning, but thought I'd toss a few good ones at you:

-- We must start with the Florida Atlanta University newspaper. It may have a ridiculously bland name (the University Press), but today's on-line version is anything but that. Reporter Jason Parsley tells us that in the student government race for president, one candidate, Kirk Murray, is under criminal investigation, apparently for taking undue advantage of a book voucher program. But Murray may still have the advantage in the runoff election, because his opponent, Tony Texiera, was banned from campaigning last night, just two days before the election. Why? He missed a mandatory SGA meeting. "This is crippling my campaign," said Texiera, an apparent master of the obvious. But hey, it may not matter anyway, since they have no idea how votes can be counted on one of the campuses. All of these stories were written on deadline by Parsley, who did an excellent job and deserves an immediate raise.

-- Also today, Lisa Huriash (my favorite Sun-Sentinel reporter) does a fine job of detailing a story about a Plantation police DUI instructor who has taught us all how to drive drunk in truly epic fashion -- at 90 miles an hour, naked, and beside a bottle of Southern Comfort. The article highlights a strange but true fact: When people get really really drunk, they often have a great desire to remove their own pants. I don't know though. It doesn't sound like instructor Laurie Primeau, who Police Chief Larry Massey is allowing to keep her job on the road patrol, has returned to reality yet. She claims she wasn't speeding, had a bathing suit bottom on, and had washed out the Southern Comfort bottle with dishwashing liquid. Chief Massey, ever a realist, tells her: "You simply may have been too drunk to remember exactly what happened." Yeah, probably.

-- Part Four of Debbie Cenziper's excellent investigative report on low-income housing, which ends today. Just thought I'd mention that. If this is an example of what investigations editor Sallah brings to the table, then the Herald definitely made one hell of a good move in hiring him from the Toledeo Blade. Also from the Herald, read this unique report from the ever-stout Alfonso Chardy.

-- And, in the Palm Beach Post, Larry Keller reports on the arrest of billionaire and bigwig Democrat Jeffrey Epstein for having sex with underaged girls in his mansion. Apparently State Attorney Barry Krischer sided with Epstein over Palm Beach Police Chief Michael Reiter on some facts of the case. The arrest is troubling. Now even a billionaire can't score teenaged girls? I mean, what has America come to?

With all due seriousness, this is a hell of a story. The girls were arranged by a Palm Beach Community College student whose apparent role model was Heidi Fleiss and cops dug through the billionaire's trash to make the case. Give Reiter an award for sheer stones.

Miami Herald Investigations Editor Michael Sallah gives an interview to PRWeek (thanks Romenesko). It's not exactly a stellar Q & A; in fact, it's short and pretty lame, especially when Sallah -- who is undoubtedly a great journalistic talent -- gives a nod to "savvy PR pros" (which I suppose was an obligation considering the publication). A good percentage of it, oddly, is about blogs:

PRWeek: What sort of impact do you think the Internet and blogging is going to have on the future of investigative reporting? Sallah: Hopefully it will be good. I think sometimes it gets muddied a little bit. What is really first-rate investigative journalism isn't always found in the bloggers and isn't always in people who are putting out their own web sites, because they don't take the time to carry out journalism in a professional manner. I mean, there is a real process of refining and experience that goes into our work. There are too many people, in the wrong hands, [who] pervert it and they bend it and they twist it so it really isn't investigative journalism. I think that what they end up doing is really feeding off the good work that is done by good journalists. And in some ways [that] helps. We get a lot of our stories out there by bloggers. They end up actually picking up our stuff and then linking to it. That is good for us. If it's good work and it holds up, you don't mind if the bloggers get a hold of it because they can actually help advance it out there on the Web for you.

PRWeek: Are there a lot of blogs that you read?
Sallah: No, not really. I do get a lot of them sent to me. I should read them more often, but I just don't have enough time. Whatever research I do on the internet and time I spend is typically for my work. You are limited on the amount of time you can spend on this kind of this stuff. So I don't spend a lot of time. So much of it is just rantings, and it is things that are personalized. That is good for some people, but I think that if you are in the trenches as investigative journalist blogging is not a priority with you. It is really about getting to the heart of news and information. Many times it doesn't involve blogging. It's not to say that good stuff isn't out there, but I think it is still in its infancy. I think the jury is still out on what kind of impact this is going to have on American journalism.

Sallah is right that blogging is still in its infancy and that most of it isn't professional investigative journalism (including this one, though it's done by a professional investigative reporter). But couldn't he have at least admitted that he reads the Pulp every now and again? Cuz you know he does.

-- I know this story from the Palm Beach Post's Brian E. Crowley is old, but Robert Wexler is such a boob. Stephen Colbert's interviews with congressional members are consistently the best part of the show and the Boca Democrat didn't disappoint him. Hey, he's a veteran politician. He knows how to pander.

-- Speaking of pandering, did you see where Miami Herald political writer Beth Reinhard knocked Democratic Congressman and Florida gubernatorial candidate Jim Davis for failing to pander properly? (I know this is old, too, but I'm still catching up). She made fun of Davis for missing a meaningless Congressional vote last Thursday to condemn the attacks on Israel (yeah, for some reason they failed to condemn the attacks on Lebanon, where ten times more people have been killed). Reinhard also brought up an old Howard Stern crony. Her lede: "Remember Stuttering John, the verbally challenged comic on the Howard Stern show who would put celebrities on the spot with painfully blunt questions?" Yeah, we remember him -- and know that he's now an announcer on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno. The misfired e-mail from the Davis camp was sort of funny, though, so the column wasn't a complete waste of time.

-- The corruption at the Plantation Acres Improvement District was pretty grotesque. I wrote about it in December. The key to the story was that elected PAID supervisors had steered a $125,000 federal grant for Hurricane Wilma clean-up to their buddies. Last Thursday, the Sentinel's Lisa Huriash tackled the subject after Lee Hillier, the former PAID manager who was fired after he started raising questions about the corruption, sued for his job back. It was a pathetic and lazy attempt at journalism. She quotes elected PAID supervisor Ron Davis, who was knee-deep in the wrongdoing at the district, to say that Hillier was fired for "incompetence" and "gross mismanagement" -- but doesn't mention that he was actually fired without cause and that Davis made no such claims at the meeting during which he was terminated. Davis, in fact, manages to dominate Huriash's half-ass little story. It's a bunch of lip-smacking. The reporter utterly fails to do what reporters are supposed to do: Find the truth. Instead she reads a lawsuit, interviews two people, and calls it a story. It's classic Huriash -- she has a long history of bending over backward to protect and coddle the politicians she covers, beginning in Pompano.

On Saturday, the Miami Herald's Karin Dryhurst tackled the PAID story. She fared much better. Dryhurst at least mentioned the contract-rigging allegations and Sunshine Law allegations. She cited the NT story, which was the journalistically sound thing to do. And she noted that Hillier was fired without cause. Basically she cleaned up Huriash's mess.

So I got an e-mail from a friend a few days ago. The friend links the Pulp on his site and seems one of his visitors had a big problem with a recent post about the situation in Lebanon. The friend, who is Jewish, sent along the e-mail he received, which read:

"Sir, I am deeply disappointed that you would print blogs with such anti-israel bias."

I wrote back:

"What troubles me is that when anybody criticizes Israel's actions, it's "anti-Israel bias." You can't have an honest discussion without somebody throwing names at you."

Then my friend, who is normally a highly reasonable fellow, fired back this response:

"They should just go in and nuke them all!!"

And he was dead serious.

This is what we're really dealing with here and we all know it. We're just afraid to say it. It's hardcore hatred -- on all sides. I don't blame or judge my friend for his reaction -- it has been instilled in him his entire life. A lot of Arabs, of course, feel the same way about Jews, hence the talk about driving them into the sea. After years of killing and bombing each other, I'd venture to say that a majority on both sides have lost all chance for reason or peace. And if I were in their shoes, on either side, I'd probably be the same way. That is to say, absolutely batshit insane.

So any observer who jumps on one side of this fight would have to be crazy. Yet most people seem bent on taking a side. Since I posted the discussion I had with Steve Kane and Frank Turek on Kane's radio show, people have pointed out to me the Crusades and the Inquisition. There are only two words to utter when those awful times in history are dredged up: no shit.

One friend said he was disappointed I hadn't brought up the slaughter of Native Americans by Christians. A well-known former politician wrote me to say he enjoyed the show and added that next time I might want to point out this line from Leviticus:

"I also will do this unto you; I will even appoint over you terror, consumption, and the burning ague, that shall consume the eyes, and cause sorrow of heart: and ye shall sow your seed in vain, for your enemies shall eat it."

Hell, why nobody has brought up the Holocaust, the atomic bombs dropped on Japan, the Vietnam debacle and El Salvador is beyond me. That would really show those pathetic Christians what war-loving, evil yo-yos they really are.

It's a loser's game. Yes, Christians have wrought unimaginable pain and suffering and plague and death on the world over the course of centuries. So have Muslims. And so have Jews, though to a lesser degree simply because they have been fewer in number and unable to wreak the havoc of the other groups. A lot of times, they've been on the wrong end of the slaughter. But lately they've been seeing their chance.

Yep. We're all a bunch of murderous bastards. The problem is that too many people are living in the past, where nothing gets solved and old battles are fought over and over again. Let's drink to it and forget about the tit-for-tat.

What we need is a novel approach, which is to say we actually need to use logic and rational thought. Unfortunately, if the G-8 summit in Russia taught us anything, it's that George W. Bush doesn't know logic, has little attention span, and less sense (as if that's news). The recordings of his obnoxious behavior there prove once and for all that he's not an engaged leader, but a spoiled little boy. Here he is with a chance of meeting with all these world leaders during a terrible time in world history (largely brought on by Bush himself) and all he's talking about is getting home. What an absolute ass. Here are some key excerpts:

-- A reporter asked him: "Does it concern you that the Beirut airport has been bombed? And do you see a risk of triggering a wider war?"

"I thought you were going to ask me about the pig," Bush replied, his little smirk intact, in reference to a smoked hog he'd eaten.

Idiot.

-- During his unguarded exchange with Tony Blair, Bush, while chomping on a roll like Diamond Jim Brady, says: "See, the irony is that what they need to do is get Syria to get Hezbollah to stop doing this shit and it's over."

Our president: the new Alanis Morrissette. That's not ironic. It's his own half-baked, asinine countervailing viewpoint. There is no evidence that Syria or Iran ordered Hezbollah's incursion into Israel or the kidnapping of the two soldiers. None. This is just the Bush Administration's line -- like WMD and Niger uranium tubes and the mobile chemical weapons labs and every other lie it's told. Once again, America, my country, is trying to stir up shit, literally, bring instability to the Middle East, while it should be trying to save Lebanon and Israel.

That isn't "tough talk," as USA Today termed it. The cable news stations had a good laugh about the president's "informal" manner. I don't give a damn about the manner and I don't give a damn if he curses. It's the substance we should care about. And, in this case, it's sheer idiocy, dangerous idiocy, and unforgivable from the leader of the free world.

Major-league asshole.

-- The tapes show that Bush spent most of his free time in Russia talking about going home. In a chat with the Chinese president, Hu Jintao, he says:

"Gotta go home - got something to do."

Got something to do? What? Cut brush at the ranch? Veto stem-cell research? Ignore the American newspapers? What in the hell could possibly be more important than trying to bring the world back on America's side after Iraq and all the other screw-ups by this president? Work for us, goddammit.

Then he says:

"Where you going, home? This is your neighborhood - it won't take you long to get home."

Hu Jintao apparently responds that it'll take him eight hours.

"You get home in eight hours? Me too! Russia is a big country, and you're a big country."

Yes, that's funny ha-ha. We don't have a president. We have an eight-year-old abroad.

Cretin.

It was a very bad show (and I'm not even detailing the exchange with Putin wherein Bush bragged about the "democracy" he's spreading in Iraq only to have the Russian leader rightfully mock him).

Lebanon, 1982

There are a lot of people with death and destruction in their hearts and minds. America has to be bigger than that, we have to listen to the better angels of our nature. A country that has shown it wants decency and democracy, Lebanon, a c0untry that has gone through more suffering and violence than we'd like to imagine, Lebanon, a country that has added to the richness and beauty of America, Lebanon, is getting blown to bits. But don't worry. While we're sending the bombs for Israel to hit it with, we're also sending humanitarian aid to those whom the same bombs maim and make homeless.

It's a fool's game -- and the leader of the United States is the biggest fool of them all.

Bad customer reviews are disappearing from the Amazon page for the book Miami Psychic like cursed benjamins at a fortune-teller's shop. Several that revealed author Regina Milbourne's true identity, Gina Marie Marks, have been axed (if you haven't followed the Miami Psychic thing, click here to catch up). But a glowing, five-star review of Marks' -- er, Milbourne's -- talent was recently posted on the site. And it's from Yvonne Carey, co-author of Miami Psychic and "special correspondent" in Weston for the Sun-Sentinel. Carey has ignored my efforts to talk to her about the book, which is so full of falsehoods and misinterpretations that it should be filed in the Fiction category:

Reviewer: Yvonne Carey (FLORIDA) - See all my reviews

It has come to the attention of those involved in the writing and publishing of the book, entitled Miami Psychic, that person(s) maliciously and willfully may have broken the rules of conduct for reviewers under the "review" prompt for the book Miami Psychic.

Amazon is clear that "Visitors may post reviews, comments, and other content;

SO LONG AS the content is not illegal, obscene, threatening,
defamatory, invasive of privacy, infringing of intellectual property rights, or otherwise injurious to third parties"

But now, there has been a potential Tortious Interference.

Simply put, the "reviewer"s admission of using the review prompt to discredit the author and the book, were intentionally damaging the co-author's contractual or other business relationships, AND disrupting the ability of the author to perform her obligations under the contract.

Amazon is not a blog in which to vent your personal vendetta. It is an online retail store.

However, Regina Milbourne warned of a backlash from the gypsy culture, skeptics, and religious right-wing conservatives.

That this book is a controversial and thought-provoking book is a given. What part of the book denied her gypsy background and psychic career corruption? None.

Ironically, is seems that the "reviewer's" inability to comprehend the material has turned them into a potential tortfeasor.

Nevertheless, Miami Psychic is based on the career of a gypsy psychic and adheres to the facts as the author recalls regarding the characters, activities and the magic.

Regina Milbourne's actual and impressive psychic abilities continue to surprise her satisfied clients and business partners, with predictions coming to pass even through this chaotic time.

My God, it can't be true. Potential tortfeasors popping up on Amazon? Good thing she'd interfering with these tortious interferers. The funny thing is that, in the middle of her defense of the book, Carey confirms that one of Milbourne's central promises in the text -- that she would stop using her God-given ability of clairvoyance on "clients" -- is a lie.

Got back from Boulder CO yesterday. Slept something like 20 hours (actually it was 16 over a 24-hour period), yet it had nothing to do with a hangover. A first for me. No, good clean family fun was had, including a ridiculously beautiful mountain hike at 13,000 feet and some tubing on Boulder Creek during which my body was flung on sharp rocks more times than I care to recall. Problem is the scrapes on my back keep reminding me. Most of the rough stuff, though, occurred during the first 10 minutes; after that it was a blast.

I was in a cabin with ma famille that had no TV, phone, A/C, or computer. The only connection I had to the blog was during a quick 15-minute check of e-mails and such at the Boulder Library. I didn't read any newspaper stories outside the Rocky Mountain News and Daily Camera (neither of which were very impressive) and don't have the urge right now to start back up again. Looks like it'll be something I'll have to ease back into. So all the work -- both great and small -- that has been done by South Florida journalists during the past five days has gone under the Pulp radar. If I missed a masterpiece send it along.

One thing (and it may well be a masterpiece) that I did start reading was Debbie Cenziper's investigation into affordable housing scams in Miami-Dade. Titled "House of Lies," it seems strong. Very strong. I like to say that Broward County is overtaking North Cuba as the corruption capital of Florida. It's undoubtedly a pretty good competition, but the Miami Herald's findings put Dade squarely back on top.

And another story I stumbled across comes from the Palm Beach Post's Allyson Bird. Her story about the horrific death -- and life -- of a 17-year-old girl begins this way: "Brittany Carleo was buried last week with a floppy stuffed pig and a cellphone."

Oh, and on the personnel front, it seems the Sun-Sentinel, as it continues its aggressive push into Palm Beach County, isn't just trying to take over the Post's circulation, it's also raiding the newspaper's talent. Well, actually that isn't anything new -- the Big Three Dailies poach one another on a regular basis. But the Sentinel, which has seen an exodus of reporters lately, is definitely looking north for replacements. They say the Sentinel is offering a lot more pay and sweet little "signing bonuses" to sway talent from the opposition to switch sides. And the management at the Post is none too pleased about it.

A couple weeks ago, Post reporter Sofia Santana gave the newspaper her two weeks notice after accepting a job offer from the Sentinel. The editors, not wanting a mole in their midst, told Sanatana she could have her two weeks at home. They ordered her to clean her desk and immediately exit the building.

On Friday, Stephanie Horvath went through the same rigamarole. She told her editors she was leaving for the enemy and was out of the office in an hour. Guess the insurance blog is going down in flames. What a shame. The last thing this world needs is one less blog.

Looks like some reporters and photographers will soon be hit up with an unexpected phone bill from the Tribune Company -- and then fired if they don't get in line. Below is a memo sent out by the newspaper's controller, Darren Beevor, to all staffers with company-issued cell phones and/or Blackberries (which is a good portion of the editorial staff):

July 19, 2006

TO: Sun-Sentinel Company Employees With
Company-Provided Cingular Phone/BlackBerry Service

FROM: Darren Beevor - Controller

RE: Cingular Phone/BlackBerry Usage Policy

All employees who use company-provided Cingular phones/BlackBerries are reminded that the company policy is for them to be used for business purposes only. A review of recent invoices determined that a large
number of calls are being regularly made that appear to be for non-business purposes. Some of these calls are international, some are extremely lengthy local calls.

While occasional use for important personal matters is understandable and explainable, continued misuse will result in disciplinary action. Other exceptions to the policy are Cingular to Cingular calls as they
have no financial impact to the company.

Beginning this week, I will distribute details of what have been deemed to be questionable and excessive calls to appropriate managers within the company, with the goal of determining whether these calls were of a
business or personal nature. If it is determined the calls are personal, employees who made the calls will be expected to reimburse the company for the cost of the calls. As I mentioned previously, continued
personal usage will result in disciplinary action, up to and including termination of employment.

If you have any questions and/or need any additional information, please contact me at extension 4245. Thanks.

There will be some conflict here. You have to wonder how it will be determined whether certain calls are of a "business or personal nature." And this idea of hitting up employees for charges before even warning them of a problem seems a bit much. But hey, God forbid a working-stiff reporter actually catch a break from a giant newspaper company, whose executives make seven figures while reporters are lucking to make mid-five.

But you can't say the Sentinel doesn't have a knack for timing. This thrifty move comes at the same time they're having a lively discussion over on Romenesko about low salaries for reporters and the corporate trend of "starving the beast." The Sentinel has apparently put the beast, at the very least, on a very strict diet.

Okay, so I told you I was going to be on Steve Kane Show this morning and you still managed to miss it. I forgive you. Instead of giving a play-by-play, the transcript is as follows. Do with it what you will. I have nothing to hide. On the show, there was Steve Kane, and Frank Turek, and myself. The main set-up you need is to know that they both wanted to convince me that the Koran is an evil instrument of hatred and Muslims are bent on world-domination no matter what we good Christian and Jewish folk try to do.

Kane

Kane, who I must say was solid and professional throughout the show, began by reading some of the post I wrote below about Rev. O'Neal Dozier, which he obviously felt was crap. He started the show by listing Muslim wars and atrocities -- Darfur, Rwanda, Somalia, Chechnya, terrorist acts, etc. It was a long list. The inference was simple: Muslims were terrible killers, flat and simple. He brought up Altaf Ali, the head of the Council of American-Islamic Relations, which he called a "front for terrorists" and Ali's statement during a recent Laura Ingraham Show that the Muslim terrorists a small group of "bad apples." Then Kane tried to quantify just how many Muslims really are in on the killing. Let's pick up Kane now. Enjoy:

KANE: I think it's a healthy percentage ...

PULP: You say a healthy percentage? What is that?

KANE: You know something, I'm going to be very honest with you, I don't think I'm qualified to name that number, but I would like Frank to put in his two cents here.

Frank

FRANK: Steve and Bob, I don't think anyone knows what that number is. But I think we can all agree it has a significant influence on the entire group of people we would call Muslims. Because how many Muslims do you see who come out publicly and really condemn those attacks? Very few. Why? Because they know if they do, they're the next target ...

PULP: The majority of Muslims are living in fear of the minority? Is that what you're saying?

FRANK: I would say there's prima facie evidence that that's the case, Bob. How many Muslims after 9-11 did you hear come out [against the attacks].

PULP: I went out and talked to a lot of imams and local Muslim leaders and I heard every one of them at least say that they wished it wouldn't have happened. Most of them said that it was an abomination. A lot of Muslim leaders in this area said that it wasn't what Islam stands for.

KANE: When 9/11 first happened ... I brought in a whole series of Muslim leaders and, yes, every one of them said 9/11 wasn't a good thing. They didn't approve of it. Which was what I would call a mild condemnation. But as I probed further, as I said, 'Well do you think that our relationship with Israel had anything to do with what happened? Do you think we brought this on ourselves?' Every single one of them got that fire in their eyes and started saying how this was a result of our foreign policy and putting bases in Saudi Arabia.

PULP: Of course it was. Are you denying that's a fact?

KANE: Yes.

PULP: How can you say that? Are you like George W. Bush and believe these people suddenly woke up evil one morning?

FRANK: Bob, this has been going on since 632. This is not a new phenonemon ... We need to create a distinction between what the Koran says and what many Muslims believe. I just came back from Iran. I was on the expedition that went to look at that object that could be Noah's Ark. I found the people in Iran to be wonderful people. They were very warm, very friendly, they liked Americans, however, that country is currently being run by mullahs who believe in the literal interpretation of the verses that Steve mentioned at the top of the show, so we obviously had to be careful over there.

KANE: I think we're getting somewhere here. I'd love to have a meeting of the minds, as far-fetched as that sounds. I think that answers your initial question. It is not the majority of Muslims, but it is a sizable minority that has a reign of terror over the rest of Muslims. Which is why, while the people of Iran are decent people, Iran as a country is a major threat to the survival of the world.

PULP: I generally agree with that. I do. I'm certainly not going to stand here and get behind the mullahs in Iran. I am just as repulsed by the idea of an Islamic state as anyone because it's a backwards society. But do these mullahs actually want to come out and cut off people's heads? I don't know. Are they really that into world domination? I think they want to be left alone to run their little societies the way they want to.

KANE: You don't believe what basically the president of Iran says now that this is all about basically destroying the United States and basically taking over the world?

PULP: People say "Death to America" because America is in their region. I don't have to bring up all the evidence and all the facts. Kissinger said oil is too important for it to be owned by Arabs and that's been the basis of our foreign policy for years.

FRANK: How come oil is three dollars a barrel over here. Or I should say three dollars a gallon, gas is three dollars a gallon.

PULP: You're saying our interest in the Middle East isn't about oil?

FRANK: Of course that's part of it.

PULP: You know it's about oil.

FRANK: We didn't go over there and confiscate their oil fields which we could have if we wanted to.

PULP: We can't just confiscate their oil fields. We found out what happens when we went to Iraq ...

KANE: We have to go to a break ... Frank asked you a great question, Bob ... if we went over there for oil why is oil is so expensive now?

PULP: Because of the conflict right now. I think it's shot up because of what's happening in Lebanon.

FRANK: Lebanon? That just happened two weeks ago.

[Kane laughs]

PULP: Yes, and it's spiked in the past two weeks. Have you not noticed?

FRANK: Why did it go from a buck-fifty to three dollars a gallon in a year and a half?

PULP: Maybe that had something to do with Iraq. That's part of the reason.

FRANK: If we went over there for oil, then gas should be 25 cents a gallon over here.

PULP: We're incompetent. We have screwed up everything we have tried to do.

[Kane took us off the to the first break. When we came back, the host quoted passages out of the Koran about killing Jews and Christian and Jihad and such]

PULP: That was written during a time of war. I want to say that you're picking out little sentences in a big book.

KANE: Little sentences in a big book? Bob, let me try to appeal to you rationally here. ... Certainly you can understand that any member of Islam who reads this book and takes it seriously is going to be a threat?

PULP: I suppose if somebody is reading just these passages and putting a lot of emphasis on just these passages, I think they could be a threat. But again, going to the geopolitical -- you know, the reality in the world right now -- there's reasons for why the terrorist attacks are occurring.

FRANK: Were the same reasons in place in 632?

PULP: You're trying to create a pattern here that this is all the Muslims' fault ...

KANE: Let me jump in on Bob's side on this Frank. Give me a second here. Bob and people who support Bob's position, people who talk about the Crusades and the Inquisition, let's limit it to the last 200 years Frank. Within that framework, how would you address Bob's question?

FRANK: Well I would go back to Thomas Jefferson who in his presidency basically declared war on the Tripoli pirates who were Muslims. Because they were invading our ships in the Mediterranean. And he went over there without the U.N. by the way to set the record straight.

PULP: They were pirates. Of course they were going to go after them.

FRANK: They were Muslim pirates.

PULP: Muslims? Were there Christian pirates? What religion was Blackbeard?

FRANK: Bob, you need to read a history book my friend.

PULP: You just said we're at war with Muslims and you bring up a group of pirates. That's pathetic.

FRANK: They were called the Barbary pirates, they were out of Tripoli. They were Muslims.

PULP: You think all pirates that attacked our ships were Muslims?

KANE: Let's go beyond the Barbary pirates.

PULP: Please do.

FRANK: Bob ... let's go back to the Olympics in 1972. Who caused that Bob?

PULP: It was