Customer Reviews:
 A somewhat flawed review of a flawed man November 17, 2008
2 out of 2 found this review helpful
I have been intruiged about how George Bush was not only elected once, but re-elected as US president. So, in a bored moment, I bought this book. It promised much,and is worth a read, but cutting to the chase, it was fascinating but fairly distorted ... not by lack of trying, but by trying too hard. Everything was force fitted into a mould that had some truth in it, but was pushed too far. In a little more detail, the backstory was fascinating, the early years likewise, and you can certainly see how his thesis of a man who wants to emulate his father's course, but also draw sharp contrast and be thought of as his own man. Having done this groundwork, it felt like the period of the presidency was skated over, and through the lens of folks like Karl Rove and Dick Cheney. Even here it paints only a sketch of Condi Rice who feels an intruiging figure who, from the little I know, I thought should have been smart enough to provide a more guiding hand. The books written fairly well, but nothing like as well as one might interpret from the reviews.
So, one of the things I was left wondering was how it got the rave reviews it did on the cover - e.g the front cover has a quote from Malcolm Gladwell (he of 'The tipping point') - "Political drama, family history and psychological insight in dazzling combination. If you read one book about George W. Bush and his presidency, this should be it". That would be the same Malcolm Gladwell thanked in the Acknowledgements for his 'keen insights and editorial suggestions' would it? And, the one who dwelt on Jacob's mother Lois extensively within 'The Tipping Point'. So, hardly the disinterested observer that you might imagine.
But, he's in good company, since Jacob also thanks Joe Klein (Author of 'Primary Colors') for the benefits that have come from conversations with him (and others) ... and Joe turns up on the back cover saying 'Scorching, powerful and entirely plausible ... a beautifully written and erudite book, hilarious at times, a joy to read'. In terms of general reviews we have 'A serious, thought-provoking effort to penetrate what instinct tells us muct be an extraordinary family drama' from the Washington Post. Jacob is editor-in-chief of Slate Group, a division of The Washington Post Company in which I must presume the Washington Post is stabled. Maybe it's an innocent connection, but after two spun connections, I am a little skeptical.
But, for all the skepticism, still worth a read, and worth three stars
 A Family Madness ** June 16, 2008
9 out of 28 found this review helpful
Drawing on some distorted form of Freudian analysis and dabbling in Shakespeare, Weisberg is at some pains to show how George W. Bush's family heritage formed the President's personality. The son is continually referencing his father in comments and actions, while at the same time trying to distance himself from the 41st President . This isn't the first effort along these lines, nor will it surely be the last. In this well-written, but terribly narrow assessment, the author carefully traces how W.'s actions are a reflection of his reactions to his President father.
The account opens with a summary history of the Bush and Walker families. Their rise, successes and especially their personalities lay the groundwork for what follows. Weisberg carefully follows W.'s life in Texas and his attempts at an education in the East. Yale was not a happy time for the young man, and his reaction to the alien world of "The Eastern Establishment" set patterns he would follow throughout his career. As he haltingly moves toward becoming the Republican nominee [although little is given of that process], Bush begins collecting the men - and a woman - who will become his "inner circle". Karl Rove is a sycophant with a dream, manipulating Bush while being subjected to W's banter. Rove is later joined by Dick Cheney, two men with a dream of remaking the Presidency and US society. It's a compelling, if highly disturbing picture.
The Iraq invasion is, of course, the pivot point for Weisberg's analysis, calling the crusade against Saddam Hussein a total blunder. Yet Weisberg, in his depiction, makes a major gaffe of his own. After making serious effort to show how Bush makes decisions with little consideration, then sticks to the choice against any contending opinions, tells us that the President had not chosen to invade until almost the final moment. This is an astounding reversal of what Weisberg has been presenting throughout the book. The author accepts that the Bush regime "honestly" felt Hussein was a threat and the war decision justified on those grounds. Weisberg lightly passes over those such as Richard Clark or Christopher Meyer who testified Bush had decided on "regime change" long before. He ignores Colin Powell's admission that he was fed a lot of "BS" to present to the UN. Indeed, the contrived WMDs the Bush regime touted so vehemently were declared missing by Hans Blix, who receives not a drop of ink here.
Nothing is offered for why US voters should have returned this misfit to the Presidency. It will be the greatest tragedy in US history if Bush leaves the Presidency without facing charges, but this eventuality never enters Weisberg's account. In fact, no real assessment of the long-term impact of the regime's many Constitutional violations is given. We are given the portrait of a vulnerable man, with the most superficial talents holding sway over government procedures and policies unfit for a democracy. Does Weisberg think any one or a generation of successive Presidents is going to be able to set right what the Bush regime has wrought? Any new President will not be able to purge the Supreme Court of the witless hacks Bush has placed there. Worse, the deep penetration of appointments vetted more for their sympathy to "Christian" evangelical views than for any abilities is not easily uprooted and dispensed with. Weisberg may have well fulfilled the mandate he set himself, but as far as the author's concerned, that will all pass into history's assessment when Bush leaves office. The effect on society will endure. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]
** with thanks to Thomas Keneally
|
