This is not really a review, more of a think piece at best.

Was the book (articles) well written, what other topics were convered, is it a worthwhile buy, etc etc

http://weekbyweek7.blogspot.com/

This is a dithering summation of the work of a partisan hack.

Was Darlene Taylor’s article meant to be a review of Andrew Bolt’s "still not sorry!" Seems like a gratuitous sales pitch to me. Shallow fan-club stuff.
Taylor offers no critique of the book’s main premise. She uncritically accepts Bolt’s wildest assertions (although she concedes he sometimes “makes connections that are a tad loose”). She makes silly assumptions of her own (“Fans and foes alike should get pleasure from Bolt’s revelation that he used to be a drummer in a dance band with a fondness for donning polka-dot bow ties and playing uncool tunes.”)
Her unabashed revelation that “Since moving to Melbourne last April, I’ve seen about five Indigenes so who knows what their position is in this otherwise diverse city” perhaps offers a clue to why she is a Bolt fan.
Taylor concludes naively: “Agree or disagree with him - I suspect a majority agree with some, most or all of his work - Bolt knows how to stimulate debate and a columnist who wasn’t capable of that wouldn’t be releasing a book.” Leaving aside the seat-of-the-pants mathematics, and the unproblematic notion of Bolt-style 'debate', there are many considerations that go into the decision to publish books. In some instances capability is about the least of them.
Let’s have a serious review of this book.

I have read already most of what Bolter's has had to say and apart from finding his style smarmy I have always considered that his arguements were based on pretty fuzzy logic -

For instance I liked his take on racism where in one article he declared he decided Australia was not rascist as Melbourne had Mayor of Chinese descent and we voted a young aboriginal girl as the Australian Idol!

Similarly after giving a pasting to Rabbit Proof Fence he turned on Finding Nemo ( I have said this b4, so sorry about the repetition)

There was a single throw away derogatory line about America - this slight which most probably missed gave rise to such a big ping on Bolters Anti American radar it generate several columns about how terrible this trend of American hating has become.

Bolter's seems to take the extreme views of a few - ie that Australia is a rascist nation and use rather limp arguements to attack any one who suggests that there are any rascist elements at all witihn our community at all.

He does the same thing with any one suggesting that there is anything at all wrong with the way the USA conducts itself on the world stage, for example, and like wise with John Howard - Bolters really is a " you are either with me or against me" kind of guy"

Bolter's described the world portrayeed by Australia's artists, writers and film makers as "usually racist, dull, cruel, shrunken in spirit and grim.”

Paradoxically if one were to describe Bolters in those terms a whole bunch of people would probably agree that those words sum him up quite nicely.

Sadly for us all Andrew, with his thin repertoire of pets hates and a rather fearless and outspoken style has been elevated to a position where he is asked his opinion on all manner of things - and the letters pages of the Herald Sun are full of "good on ya's" and "spot on Andrew!" - usually in response to a dull, cruel, shrunken in spirit and grim diatribe.

Any chance of Murdock offering him a job on FOX NEWS, he would be right at home with that crew,he would be like Noddy to O,Reillys Big ears.

How about Andrew Bolt as host of "Media Watch" , then it may become less of a lefty scab picking exercise and be watchable.