Latest Lists

The New York Times' Best Books Of 2009 does not include Sarah Palin's new book? Why? or why not?

http://www.nytimes.com/gift-guide/holiday-2009/100-notable-books-of-2009-gift-guide/list.html How can Conservatives trust the NY Times Best Seller list if they don't trust the NY Times?

Public Comments

1. because you touch yourself at night
2. Because the list is NOT based on sales. If it were, it would come out in January.
3. because ny times is a liberal bs tabloid they soon to be out of buinsess anyway jus chill stop looking for them to verify our efforts
4. I believe it is called the, "Best" books not the dumbest books.
5. I don't trust anythnig from the Times, or even the people that read the Times. With almost half a million copies sold, "Going Rogue” trounces the performance of President Barack Obama’s 2007 “Audacity of Hope” which had sold 67,000 copies a week after publication, Nielsen figures show.
6. It probably hadn't been out for long enough. - Libertarian
7. Because the best-seller's list is objective -- it is based on book sales. If your book sells well enough, it's on the list. It's all about numbers. The Times' Best Books of 2009 is not objective. It's subjective. It's based on the NY Times' editors' opinions. And since those guys are a bunch of far-lefties, are you really surprised that Palin's book isn't on their list? .
8. No doubt it was knocked off the list by "Promises to Keep: On Life and Politics by Joe Biden." lol. I didn't think Old Joe could read...much less write.
9. Because her book just came out. It wouldn't be on the Bestseller's List until *next* year. (And that's only if she's sold enough copies to really make a difference. "The Liar's Guide to the Galaxy" isn't something I would swear my fealty to--if I were the Republican Party.)
10. Because Palin's book is a book of talking points, not even her own talking points, gives no logical reasoning behind those talking points, and lots of whining about how McCain's campaign didn't know jack about what it was doing. She gave nothing in her book to warrant being put on a Best Books of 2009 list, no matter who was doing the list. Any Republican newspaper trying to do the same thing as the New York Times, and trying to do a legitimate list, would not put Sarah Palin's book on their list, either.
11. The list is for the BEST books based on literary merit not sales. I don't think too many conservatives actually buy the New York Times ... too many hard words!
12. It so happens that I have a couple of books on that list. This is one of them,'Horse Soldiers: The Extraordinary Story of a Band of U.S. Soldiers Who Rode to Victory in Afghanistan'. This is about the Special Forces helping the local tribesman fight the Taliban. It's an excellent read. Then there's this one about one of my favorite authors, 'Flannery: A Life of Flannery O’Connor'. There are a lot of books our there that I think are far more interesting than Palin's book. I don't have time to waste on something that a hack helped her put together. I'm too busy trying to write a novel to worry about her book.
13. Because this is not the best seller list, it is the best and most notable books of fiction and non-fiction. Palin's book hardly qualifies as "best." And I just have to snipe a bit, perhaps they were having trouble decided if it was fiction or non-fiction.
14. As the New York Times list was published on the 27th November and the Palin book was only released 10 days before this it would have been astounding if the book had made the list even if it had been a great work. If they had time to read it, the list does not include this book because those who's job it was to draw up the shortlist did not consider her book to be one of the top non-fiction books of the year. In addition she did not even write the book, it was written by Lynn Vincent her ghostwriter