In any event, the buzz generated has created an attempt to Googlebomb the book. You can't pay for that kind of publicity. Jonah is going to be rich!
But I think that the reason this book has generated so much publicity is that it touches on commonly and wrongly held assumptions. For instance, if you were to use the classical definition for liberalism, you would find that liberals are people who believe in
the importance of human rationality, individual property rights, natural rights, the protection of civil liberties, constitutional limitations of government, free markets, and individual freedom from restraint as exemplified in the writings of Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill,, Montesquieu, Voltaire , Thomas Paine and others.Now compare this list with the objectives of people who call themselves "liberals" today. You can't be trusted to smoke, let your child ride a bike spend your money the way that you want. You should also succumb to what the government thinks best with regard to health care, schools, speed limits, and just about any other item that a special interest group is able to get the government to impose on you. Oh, and Free Markets? they simply don't or shouldn't be allowed to function because they are made up of those evil corporations.
Getting back to my point, I think that the reason that the Left is so upset with Goldberg's book, is that it strikes a chord that they recognize, and don't really like about themselves. Not that I think that todays Liberals are Nazis, but that the same techniques used by Mussolini who is associated with Hitler in the Axis Pact, are in play here. And even then, it's not that the particular policies are necessarily evil, but I do think that the Left fails to appreciate that even good intentions can have disastrous results, and if hijacked by people with evil intent, can become so destructive to the individual that they bear no relation to the original intent of being liberal.
But what do I know? Since I am not a member of the Left, I must be a fascist, right?